[latexrefman] @file or @code for package names
Hefferon, Jim S.
jhefferon at smcvt.edu
Tue Aug 17 16:03:25 CEST 2021
I have to be candid; I'm really not good with remembering things like this. If we did that, I'd try to remember, but at 62 I have learned enough about myself to know that I will forget. Sorry.
Mathematicians usually work in comfortable offices.
--US Bureau of Labor Statistics
From: latexrefman <latexrefman-bounces+jhefferon=smcvt.edu at tug.org> on behalf of Vincent Belaïche <vincent.belaiche at gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2021 5:41
To: Karl Berry
Subject: Re: [latexrefman] @file or @code for package names
⚠ External Sender ⚠
What about having a one-arg macro @package, so we can give a specific
definiton for HTML or TeX output if we whish some day… ? Also,
incidentally, this would make the Texinfo source more maintainable.
Le dim. 15 août 2021 à 23:20, Karl Berry <karl at freefriends.org> a écrit :
> We use both, and Karl changed some @file to @code in revision 914.
> What is our _official_ way ?
> There is no official way.
> My idea was that @code makes more sense because a package name, say
> geometry, is not a file. geometry.sty is a file.
> All those different markup commands (@env, @option, etc.) make no
> practical difference, so it's not worth worrying about, IMHO. -k
More information about the latexrefman