# Sections that compilation ignores (Texmaker)

Can I create "sections" in a .tex document that compilation will ignore, but will be reflected in the structure of the document, as displayed in texmaker to the left of the window?

When I write a .tex document with Texmaker (windows) and I use the commands \section or \subsection, this is reflected on the left side of the window: there is a list of all sections, subsection, subsubsections etc... This list is extremely useful for navigation within a document. Can I have a list like this show up while using texmaker, that will be ignored by the compiling process?

I need it for easy browsing and better orientation within the document.

My solution at the moment is very primitive: I use the standard \section command, and once I'm done writing the text, I place % signs in front of the sections I want Latex to ignore.

Edit I've noticed today that sometimes texmaker still displays %\section{whatever} as a real section in the sidebar, but I'm not sure wether it's a bug or a feature, and I don't know what triggered it, nor what turned it off eventually.

There seem to be several ways …

## 1 use the bookmark feature (by texenthusiast)

TeXmaker provides the option to add up to three book marks to your code. (TeXstudio which is a more flexile fork, can add up to ten book marks)

## 2 use the comment package (by Torbjørn)

\usepackage{comment}
% ...
\begin{comment}
\section{I'm not here}
\end{comment}


## 3 hide it from TeX with booleans

You can use \iffalse which is a boolean operation that is always false and the following code will be ignored. Every \if… must be ended with a \fi.

\iffalse
\section{I'm not here}
\fi


## 4 using different files

This is not a real answer to you question but maybe it will help if you separate your code in several files and load them with \input or \include. I guess \input would be better here (see When should I use \input vs. \include?). Again I like the handling of multiple files in TeXstudio better.

• The comment package is just what I needed, thanks! – Olivier Bégassat Oct 7 '13 at 2:43