> From: Gavin Smith <gavinsmith0...@gmail.com> > Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 20:54:39 +0100 > > Does it sound like a good idea to separate the warning code from the > code updating the structure? If we could do this, I feel like I would > have a good chance of being able to write structure-checking code that > didn't produce so many warnings. > > The focus would be on reporting problems with menus, with the assumption > that the error is in the menus (user forgot to update the menus or didn't > update them correctly) and not the sectioning structure inferred from > the order of nodes in the input file.
I think this would be a very good improvement. As things are now, without knowing that prev/next/up pointers are deduced from menus, it is impossible to understand these error messages, because they are talking about node pointers that simply aren't there! Thanks.
