> Here there are not only two @sortas, but also nested @sortas, the
> expanded Texinfo code (expanded by texi2any) is like:
>
> @findex @sortas{@sortas{bbb}ddd X}@sortas{bbb}ddd
>
> texi2any warns about this, rightly in my opinion:
>
> sortas_sortas.texi:13: warning:
> @sortas should not appear in @sortas (possibly involving @funindex)
> sortas_sortas.texi:13: warning:
> @sortas should only appear in an index entry (possibly involving @funindex)
>
> My feeling is that if Texinfo TeX is broken by this input it is not
> really a problem.
I'm not convinced. The argument to `@sortas` is for the index
generator; I would expect that the argument of `@sortas` gets handled
in verbatim mode, i.e., it gets completely ignored by TeX except while
writing the unsorted index file. In other words, `@` should no longer
start a command after the outermost `@sortas` command has read its
argument; there shouldn't occur any recursive behaviour. The only
limitations are balanced braces, but this is necessary for other
commands, too.
> If there are two @sortas in one index entry, like
>
> @findex @sortas{first} cc @sortas{second}
>
> texi2any does not warn and use the second to sort, as you said. I
> have no problem with not warning, however, what is used for sorting
> should be considered to be undefined, could be the first @sortas,
> the second one, both together, none at all.
Why undefined? I suggest that the last entry always wins.
Werner
