> Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 18:43:17 +0200 > From: Patrice Dumas <pertu...@free.fr> > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 06:44:31PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 10:19:15 +0200 > > > From: Patrice Dumas <pertu...@free.fr> > > > Cc: stefano.lattar...@gmail.com, bug-autoconf@gnu.org, bug-texi...@gnu.org > > > > > > My wild guess is that this strange behaviour of makeinfo in C is a > > > result of the order of expansion that happens by chance, and is not > > > intended. > > > > No, it's intended. > > You mean that it is intended that the comment is removed as part of the > user defined macro expansion?
Yes, AFAIR using the comment is a common trick to prevent a newline from being emitted after the macro. > Once again the difference is not on keeping or not the end of line, as I > showed with the examples done with makeinfo in C which do remove the end > of line. The difference is the order of comment removal with respect to > macro expansion. This change will break existing uses in subtle ways. > I could try to provide with a backward compatibility mode in which > comments are removed when expanding macros bodies, but I doubt it is > worth it. Well, Eric explained the issue clearly: there's a need to have some form that will work with minimum fuss with both C makeinfo and the new one. If, for some reason, keeping backward compatibility is not possible or unreasonable (although, I don't see how it can break things), then you should tell how to change the Texinfo sources to work OK with both versions.
