Re: automatic anchors for definition commands.

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@elta.co.il>]

> Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 20:50:19 -0600 (CST)
> From: Luc Teirlinck <teirllm@dms.auburn.edu>
> 
> A larger and larger percentage of these anchors is starting to refer
> to function and variable definitions.  There are _many_ nodes (or
> parts of nodes), say `(elisp)Related Topics', section 12.11 in the
> printed manual, that are index-like lists of references to function
> and variable definitions.  Unlike the "real" indices, they do not
> refer to the page numbers _of the definitions_ in the printed manual.
> (They refer to the beginning of the section, which can be several
> pages off.)

Note that in some case, this might be actually a good idea: reading
from the section beginning might give you a broader perspective on the
subject.

I don't have a firm opinion on the automatic anchoring you suggest; at
first glance, it sounds like a lot of work for a relatively small
benefit.