Re: Comments wanted on code highlighting in PDF output

[Jean Abou Samra]

Le 21/02/2022 à 17:42, Luca Fascione a écrit :
> Looks lovely to me.
>
> I notice the inline source is not highlighted, is that on purpose?
> (say 2.1.7, page 23). A lot of other text I've seen seems to use the same
> highlighting patterns for running code as well as display boxes of code,
> esp given the fonts you picked are so regular in the weight, wouldn't it
> look better?



As with the syntax highlighting in HTML output that was
already added (https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/1019,
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2021-12/msg00107.html 
and other threads),
this is not straightforward to achieve. The problem is that
the Texinfo source uses @code for anything that should
appear in typewriter font. Not all uses of @code are for
LilyPond input. 'git grep -o "@code" | wc -l' will give you
an idea of the amount of effort that would be required to
introduce a distinction ...

Also, often we use @var inside @code, resulting in italics,
to denote variadic parts (e.g.: "The syntax of @code{\relative}
is @code{\relative @var{pitch} @var{music}}, where @var{pitch}
is ..."). If italics were used for fixed syntactic elements,
there would be confusion between the two uses.


Best,
Jean