Date:	Sun, 15 Mar 1998 13:09:31 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id:	<199803151809.NAA17990@delorie.com>
From:	DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To:	eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il
CC:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.980315152145.9861D-100000@is> (message from Eli
	Zaretskii on Sun, 15 Mar 1998 15:24:10 +0200 (IST))
Subject:	Re: Portability docs

> > @port-note <target> <note>
> > @port-note-cont <continuation of note>
> > @port-note-break
> > @port-note-cont <new paragraph in note>
> > @port-note <another target> <another note>
>
> One thing I'd suggest to try to ditch is the ...-cont and ..-break tags.  
> Can't the program decide on its own where one note ends and another 
> begins?


I agree; it should be simple.  Yes, flexibility is nice, but we don't
*want* it to be *too* complicated.

I suggest dropping the -cont and -break, and making these two
assumptions:

1. Adjacent notes with the same target are continuations.

2. You can't put two paragraphs in one note.

If you find you need more than one paragraph, then either (1) you're
talking about some other compiler too much, or (2) it should be in the
main section of the documentation instead.

- Raw text -