John Snow <js...@redhat.com> writes: > On Wed, Jun 19, 2024, 8:03 AM Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> John Snow <js...@redhat.com> writes: >> >> > Change get_doc_indented() to preserve indentation on all subsequent text >> > lines, and create a compatibility dedent() function for qapidoc.py to >> > remove that indentation. This is being done for the benefit of a new >> >> Suggest "remove indentation the same way get_doc_indented() did." >> > > Aight. > > >> > qapidoc generator which requires that indentation in argument and >> > features sections are preserved. >> > >> > Prior to this patch, a section like this: >> > >> > ``` >> > @name: lorem ipsum >> > dolor sit amet >> > consectetur adipiscing elit >> > ``` >> > >> > would have its body text be parsed as: >> >> Suggest "parsed into". >> > > Why? (I mean, I'll do it, but I don't see the semantic difference > personally) >
"Parse as <language>" vs. "Parse into <representation>". >> > (first and final newline only for presentation) >> > >> > ``` >> > lorem ipsum >> > dolor sit amet >> > consectetur adipiscing elit >> > ``` >> > >> > We want to preserve the indentation for even the first body line so that >> > the entire block can be parsed directly as rST. This patch would now >> > parse that segment as: >> >> If you change "parsed as" to "parsed into" above, then do it here, too. >> >> > >> > ``` >> > lorem ipsum >> > dolor sit amet >> > consectetur adipiscing elit >> > ``` >> > >> > This is helpful for formatting arguments and features as field lists in >> > rST, where the new generator will format this information as: >> > >> > ``` >> > :arg type name: lorem ipsum >> > dolor sit amet >> > consectetur apidiscing elit >> > ``` >> > >> > ...and can be formed by the simple concatenation of the field list >> > construct and the body text. The indents help preserve the continuation >> > of a block-level element, and further allow the use of additional rST >> > block-level constructs such as code blocks, lists, and other such >> > markup. Avoiding reflowing the text conditionally also helps preserve >> > source line context for better rST error reporting from sphinx through >> > generated source, too. >> >> What do you mean by "reflowing"? >> > > Poorly phrased, was thinking about emacs too much. I mean munging the text > post-hoc for the doc generator such that newlines are added or removed in > the process of re-formatting text to get the proper indentation for the new > rST form. > > In prototyping, this got messy very quickly and was difficult to correlate > source line numbers across the transformation. > > It was easier to just not munge the text at all instead of munging it and > then un-munging it. > > (semantic satiation: munge munge munge munge.) Is this about a possible alternative solution you explored? Keeping .get_doc_indented() as is, and then try to undo its damage? [...]
