[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [help-texinfo] Fwd: Texinfo questions
From: |
sr |
Subject: |
Re: [help-texinfo] Fwd: Texinfo questions |
Date: |
Sat, 07 Feb 2015 12:39:05 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 |
Hi Gavin, Karl and all,
As a loyal user of Texinfo since 10 years, I feel free to subscribe to
this list.
At first, many thanks to the Texinfo authors and contributors. Texinfo
quality output is still unsurpassed today.
I also really appreciate "@command" tags as I can't understand the
"strange" design of thoses "new doc tools" with theses "dots, spaces,
CR" based formats.
Incidentally, defining some aliases around @chapters allows me to
fold/unfold whole chapters with the Texinfo lexer I wrote for a new,
gpl, insanely configurable, very light, console and graphic mode, multi
platform editor I recently discovered : Textadept (*).
I use Texinfo mainly to produce PDF, EPUB and HTML outputs, with doc
generators for specifications and API listings, most in the Ada language
area.
No, and it won't be. The way @cartouche is implemented it would be a
drastic amount of work to allow page breaks. Hardly seems worth it.
ok
"@cartouche" is best used to highlight short phrases and concepts, I guess.
I avoid using "@cartouche" with more than 2/3 lines because the layout
quickly deteriorated when exceeding 7/8 lines (with large blocks of
unwanted white lines) due to the "one page design" of @cartouche.
>I'm dreaming to have something like "@sourcenumbered [name]" :
It's been a desired feature for a long time, but never implemented.
(Partly because there was never an explicit request for it before.)
My suggestion was to @input an automatically generated file with the
line numbers added.
Yes, I agree.
OK, If I understand well, there is two alternatives to handle all output
formats :
- 1) should be generated outside Texinfo, by including "pretty printed"
sources, produced by an external process (as you suggest)...
- 2) should be generated inside Texinfo code, by writing new TeX code to
handle the source layout...
Do I understand well ?
Browsing texinfo.tex, I feel solution 1) should be preferred, and even
better, pretty printing source should be directly included in our Ada
source doc generator.
Am I right ?
All the best from Germany.
Stef
(*)
This allows me to handle huge Texinfo documents gracefully.
A fair review :
http://yfl.bahmanm.com/Members/ttmrichter/software-reviews/textadept-review
I'm not affiliate with TextAdept author nor have any interest to promote
it, just an information I feel good to share here, as very good (and
light) editor with Texinfo lexer and fold/unfold functions is not so
common...
--
Stéphane Rivière
Ile d'Oléron - France
Freiburg Im Breisgau - Deutschland
smime.p7s
Description: Signature cryptographique S/MIME