Is there a nicer alternative to glossaries package? It's a pita to use. Documentation is lacking examples, some commands don't do anything (like \glssee), it is hard to customize (why can't I make my glossary a simple section?), it is stateful - I have to call makeglossaries in a certain place, and also the syntax for defining new entries is ugly:
\newglossaryentry{blah}{name=blah, description={blabh lbah blah}}
It's like xml.
No offense to the creators, but I am just curious if anyone else feels this way and if there are alternatives?
:D– Count Zero Jun 13 '12 at 21:22\glsseedoes ‘something’ if you use it after\makeglossaries. – mhp Jun 14 '12 at 8:42\usepackage[section=section, numberedsection]{glossaries}. – mhp Jun 14 '12 at 8:47glossariespackage is rather complex, but, in my experience, it enables you to realize nearly anything related to glossaries, lists of acronyms, notations etc. Since theglossariespackage includes tree-like styles it might also serve as a replacement for many index-related packages. Moreover, I haven’t seen any package that supportsxindyin a comparable manner. – mhp Jun 14 '12 at 8:52