[Doc-SIG] directive for flexible literate programming support?
Frank Siebenlist
franks at mcs.anl.gov
Tue Dec 9 14:31:08 EST 2003
Aahz wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2003, Frank Siebenlist wrote:
>
>>If not, one option could be to introduce a directive that would specify how
>>to recognize literate blocks, like:
>>
>>.. literate-block :: ">"
>>
>>which would indicate that for rest of this file, a literate block could
>>also be identified with a block where the lines start with ">" besides the
>>normal whitespace indentation.
>
>
> Actually, what it would substitute for is Python's interactive mode;
> reST already understands::
>
> >>> x = 1
Yes, I looked at that when I started - too bad for my case that "it" was decided
to use three ">" instead of a single one ;-)
> as belonging to a literal block that comes from Python's interactive
> mode. The main problem for your request is the interface; do we only
> allow simple strings? What about regexes? What about plug-in code?
Just for my case and probably the formatting of literate code snippets in
general, a simple string would suffice.
I can't think of any use cases where you would need the added complexity of
regexes, while I don't know what "plug-in code" is but is sounds scary from a
complexity point of view...
-Frank.
--
Frank Siebenlist franks at mcs.anl.gov
The Globus Alliance - Argonne National Laboratory
More information about the Doc-SIG
mailing list