On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Hans Hagen wrote:
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
Are users supposed to use %D kind of remarks to comment their own environment files? I am finding it a bit strange to work with. Does
well, it has been so for a long time; originally there were also %S lines for the formal command definitions
anyhow, the %D is used to signal text that wil be typeset in a 'documentation run'
in the editor that i use, i can remove/add %D's on a selection, so it's no real burden
one have to leave a blank line after a %D line for that line to appear?
no, but it's just that i like a spacy layout; if it does not work, then there is a bug in ctxtools
[code deleted]
and look at the output of texmfstart texexec --modules test.tex. Why are the first two macro definitions not in the pdf?
in ctxtools.rb, locate:
inlocaldocument = indocument inlocaldocument = false # else first line skipped when not empty
please test all kind of variants (there most have been a reason for this, so it may as well be a bug related to translating from perl to ruby)
From the code, I can not understand why inlocaldocument is there. Setting indocument to false works as expected. This is equivalent to removing inlocaldocument completely (the unless inlocaldocument is always run). I will do some more elaborate tests to check is anything breaks.
Should the test-suite contain tests for ruby scripts also? Aditya