Ozgur Ugras BARAN wrote: > On 10/6/06, Juergen Spitzmueller > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Ozgur Ugras BARAN wrote: >> > I plan to support splitidx, since it runs once on the file. So, it is >> > easier to handle. For example, I will not have to control the number >> > of indices, since the file write handle of Latex is limited. >> >> This is a strong argument IMO. The 16 writes are not much if you are >> using sectionated bibliographies and a splitted index plus a toc, a lot >> and a lof. >> > Maybe.. but, you know, in some day users will complain as, where is my > twentieth index etc. The problem here is to keep track of number of > writes, some of which are not index related files, not to exceed > number 16. My programming habits tell me I should control it for the > sake of consistency. But, I am too lazy/ have too little time to > implement it. This is why my first choice is splitidx.
I think you misunderstood Jürgen. I believe he agrees with you. > I have already sent the inetcommandparams changes. There is no change > for insetcommand from me.. Georg will improve it a little and submit > to svn, i guess.. This is necessary also for my nomencl > implementation.. I am currently short on time, but will try to do it over the weekend. Georg
