8

Is there a command that expands to the current section name (which I can then use with \index{})?

This is similar to Name of current section/figure, but I like to get the name of the section instead of the current type, also \nameref{} doesn't work when using index. I tried

\label{sec:foo} \index{\nameref{sec:foo}}

which will show the current section name in Index, but it's out of order with the other non-\nameref{} Index entries. I believe that's because they are hyperlinked.

Community
  • 1
Flow
  • 1,013
  • 1
    Dirty hack: add \let\oldsection\section, \def\section#1#{\sectionii{#1}}\def\sectionii#1#2{\def\currsecname{#2}\oldsection#1{#2}} to your preamble; then in each section \currsecname holds the name of the current section. – Bruno Le Floch Feb 13 '12 at 13:06
  • @Bruno: did not work for me :( Undefinied control sequenz – Megachip Nov 22 '12 at 21:32
  • @Megachip Which control sequence is undefined? Maybe you have a typo? – Bruno Le Floch Nov 23 '12 at 20:29

1 Answers1

4
\documentclass[a4paper]{article}
\usepackage{makeidx}
\usepackage{nameref}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\makeindex

\newcommand{\indexref}[1]{%
  \sbox0{\nameref{#1}}%
  \expandafter\index\expandafter{\GetTitleStringResult}}

\begin{document}
\section{A section}\label{x}\indexref{x}
\end{document}

According to the documentation of nameref.sty, the title to which \label{x} refers is stored in the macro \GetTitleStringResult (globally). So we emit \nameref{x} in a box just to get the title and expand the macro containing the title before applying \index.

egreg
  • 1,121,712
  • 1
    Thanks a log egreg, this does work! But there is now way to get the current section name from a command, so that I could avoid the detour with \label{} and \nameref{}? – Flow Feb 13 '12 at 13:46
  • You might redefine \section, but it's tedious; this has the merit to work with any sectional level. – egreg Feb 13 '12 at 13:53
  • You should be able to define \newcommand\labelandindex[1]{\label{#1}\indexref{#1} to at least avoid writing everything twice, shouldn't you? – yo' Nov 21 '13 at 08:00