[email protected] (Karl Berry) writes:
> Hi Simon,
>
> Is the intention that even the n...@acronym{gnu} cases should be
> replaced? Then what purpose is the @acronym keyword for?
>
> I wrote about that earlier. Minor typographic change which is rarely
> used in GNU manuals. De facto standard is not to use it. Which is
> also simpler in the source. To try to use it consistently/everywhere
> leads into deep waters (I have to do this in my TeX editorial life,
> and it is exceedingly time-consuming). And it can't be used in node
> names in any case, so there will always be inconsistencies. Do we
> have to keep going with this?
Thanks for explaining Karl. I noticed several uses of @acronym in some
of my projects (mostly @acronym{GNU} and @acronym{POSIX}). A gnulib
syntax-check test for this seems useful, to foster harmonization across
GNU packages. How about the patch below?
/Simon
diff --git a/top/maint.mk b/top/maint.mk
index d2248d8..67421f2 100644
--- a/top/maint.mk
+++ b/top/maint.mk
@@ -561,6 +561,13 @@ sc_GFDL_version:
@re='$(_GFDL_regexp)' msg='GFDL vN, N!=3' \
$(_prohibit_regexp)
+# Don't use Texinfo @acronym{} as it is not a good idea.
+sc_texinfo_acronym:
+ @grep -nE '@acronym{' \
+ $$($(VC_LIST_EXCEPT) | grep -E '\.texi$$') && \
+ { echo '$(ME): found use of Texinfo @acronym{}' 1>&2; \
+ exit 1; } || :
+
cvs_keywords = \
Author|Date|Header|Id|Name|Locker|Log|RCSfile|Revision|Source|State
