Add patch

[ikiwiki.git] / doc / todo / syntax_highlighting.mdwn

diff --git a/doc/todo/syntax_highlighting.mdwn b/doc/todo/syntax_highlighting.mdwn
index fec3f963f3320326e2170bc79796360cf4d1fd7d..5df1857050e0585daf457f0109517af387e59823 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/todo/syntax_highlighting.mdwn
+++ b/doc/todo/syntax_highlighting.mdwn
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ Ideally, it should support both converting whole source files into wiki
 pages, as well as doing syntax highlighting as a preprocessor directive 
 (which is either passed the text, or reads it from a file).
 
-The big list of possibilities:
+## The big list of possibilities
 
 * [[plugins/contrib/highlightcode]] uses [[cpan Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate]],
   operates on whole source files only, has a few bugs (see
@@ -22,9 +22,9 @@ The big list of possibilities:
   support [[bugs/multiple_pages_with_same_name]].
 * [[sourcecode|todo/automatic_use_of_syntax_plugin_on_source_code_files/discussion]]
   also uses src-highlight, and operates on whole source files.
-  Has problems with [[bugs/multiple_pages_with_same_name]].
+  Updated to work with the fix for [[bugs/multiple_pages_with_same_name]].  Untested with files with no extension, e.g. `Makefile`.
 
-General problems:
+## General problems
 
 * Using non-perl syntax highlighting backends is slow. I'd prefer either
   using a perl module, or a multiple-backend solution that can use a perl
@@ -32,6 +32,10 @@ General problems:
   we could use an external plugin..)
 * Currently no single plugin supports both modes of operation (directive
   and whole source file to page).
+
+  > This is now fixed by the [[ikiwiki/directive/format]] directive for all
+  > whole-source-file plugins, right?
+
 * Nothing seems to support 
   [[wiki-formatted_comments|wiki-formatted_comments_with_syntax_plugin]]
   inside source files. Doing this probably means post-processing the 
@@ -45,6 +49,17 @@ General problems:
   One approach that's also been requested for eg,
   [[plugins/contrib/mediawiki]] is to allow controlling which linkification
   types a page type can have on it.
+
+  > The previous two points seem to be related.  One thought: instead of
+  > getting the source from the `content` parameter, the plugin could
+  > re-load the page source.  That would stop directives/links from
+  > being processed in the source.  As noted above, comments
+  > could then be parsed for directives/links later.
+  >
+  > Would it be worth adding a `nodirectives` option when registering
+  > an htmlize hook that switches off directive and link processing before
+  > generating the html for a page?
+
 * The whole-file plugins all get confused if there is a `foo.c` and a `foo.h`.
   This is trivially fixable now by passing the keepextension option when
   registering the htmlize hooks, though.
@@ -60,3 +75,52 @@ General problems:
   Not clear how to fix this, as ikiwiki is very oriented toward file
   extensions. The workaround is to use a directive on a wiki page, pulling
   in the Makefile.
+
+  > I wonder how hard it would be to make a patch whereby a file with
+  > no `.` in the name, and a name that matches a filetype, and where
+  > that filetype was registered `keepextension`, then the file is just
+  > chosen as the appropriate type.  This would allow `Makefile` to
+  > work.
+
+like this:
+
+    diff --git a/IkiWiki.pm b/IkiWiki.pm
+    index 8d728c9..1bd46a9 100644
+    --- a/IkiWiki.pm
+    +++ b/IkiWiki.pm
+    @@ -618,6 +618,8 @@ sub pagetype ($) { #{{{
+       
+       if ($page =~ /\.([^.]+)$/) {
+               return $1 if exists $hooks{htmlize}{$1};
+    +  } elsif ($hooks{htmlize}{$page}{keepextension}) {
+    +          return $page;
+       }
+       return;
+     } #}}}
+
+## format directive
+
+Rather than making syntax highlight plugins have to provide a preprocessor
+directive as well as handling whole source files, perhaps a generic format
+directive could be used:
+
+       \[[!format pl """..."""]]
+
+That would run the text through the pl htmlizer, from the syntax hightligh
+plugin. OTOH, if "rst" were given, it would run the text through the rst
+htmlizer. So, more generic, allows mixing different types of markup on one
+page, as well as syntax highlighting. Does require specifying the type of
+format, instead of allowing it to be guessed (which some syntax highlighters
+can do). (This directive is now implemented..)
+
+Hmm, this would also allow comments inside source files to have mdwn
+embedded in them, without making the use of mdwn a special case, or needing
+to postprocess the syntax highlighter output to find comments.
+
+       /* \[[!format mdwn """
+
+       This is a comment in my C file. You can use mdwn in here.
+
+       """]] */
+
+Note that this assumes that directives are expanded in source files.