On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 09:23:15AM +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 08:54:39PM +0100, Gavin Smith wrote:
> >
> > 'complete_node_tree_with_menus' is not an easy function to read.
> > This function, as it is named (complete_node_tree_with_menus) uses
> > "menu directions" to com
On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 08:23:30PM +0100, Gavin Smith wrote:
> I wanted to try some changes to the code checking the structure of
> sections and menus. I changed the code in Texinfo/Structuring.pm first,
> and wanted to know how this affected the output of the test suite.
> However, running the te
> From: Gavin Smith
> 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 s
On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 08:23:30PM +0100, Gavin Smith wrote:
> I wanted to try some changes to the code checking the structure of
> sections and menus. I changed the code in Texinfo/Structuring.pm first,
> and wanted to know how this affected the output of the test suite.
> However, running the te
On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 08:54:39PM +0100, Gavin Smith wrote:
>
> 'complete_node_tree_with_menus' is not an easy function to read.
> This function, as it is named (complete_node_tree_with_menus) uses
> "menu directions" to complete any gaps in node directions, but it also
> warns on any mismatches
