On 2010-04-06, Georg Brandl wrote: > Am 06.04.2010 20:05, schrieb Roberto Alsina:
>> I can't claim to know LateX but the latest docutils has a different >> visit_inline than Sphinx: ... Yes, because the issue of "classified" inline nodes was fixed after the fork of Sphinx and this fix (like many others) is not yet ported. So, the "generic" approach for code-block works for LaTeX with Docutils but not with Sphinx. >> As far as I can follow the explanation from >> http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/user/latex.html that means it calls a >> macro called \DUroleCLASSARGUMENT{} which can then do things like setting a >> bold font and whatnot. Exactly. >> If LaTex is capable of setting bold, italic, monospaced font and >> foreground colour, then a set of such macros could be autogenerated >> from the pygment stylesheets (I create rst2pdf's stylesheets that way) >> thus allowing the LaTeX writer to process the output of the proposed >> codeblock directive. This is doable. Alternatively, this could be left to the user (or a set of semi-automatically generated sample styles be provided). > You are right, I would say. But the fact remains that this would be > quite a few hours of work to get right, and to test that everything > works as it did before, including the somewhat hairy issue of fallback > for token types whose parents are styled. Therefore, and because I > have like seventy-six other items on my todo and wish list for Sphinx, > it is unlikely I will do that rewrite any time soon :) There is a GSOC project/plan with the aim to add code highlighting to Docutils which (hopefully) will go this "generic" way. If successfull, this could be ported to Sphinx, hopefully. Günter -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sphinx-dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sphinx-dev?hl=en.
