X-Git-Url: https://sipb.mit.edu/gitweb.cgi/ikiwiki.git/blobdiff_plain/65bf71d387ba406d4fcf697d76151b6953176cf8..e7d04199ec730deecc95b55679515bc5618526f8:/doc/todo/syntax_highlighting.mdwn diff --git a/doc/todo/syntax_highlighting.mdwn b/doc/todo/syntax_highlighting.mdwn index e992cc514..2bdeb62be 100644 --- 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 @@ -22,15 +22,22 @@ 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`. +* [[users/jasonblevins]]'s code plugin uses src-highlight, and supports both + while file and directive use. -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 - module as one option. + module as one option. (Or, if there's a great highlighter python module, + 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 @@ -41,6 +48,20 @@ General problems: * The whole-file plugins tend to have a problem that things that look like wikilinks in the source code get munged into links by ikiwiki, which can have confusing results. Similar problem with preprocessor directives. + 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. @@ -48,7 +69,60 @@ General problems: about it is that, when creating a new page, you can then pick "c" or "h" or "pl" etc from the dropdown that normally has "mdwn" etc in it. Is this a bug, or a feature? (Even if a feature, plugins with many - extensions make the dropdown unusable..) -* The per page highlighters can't handle "Makefile", or other files - without a significant extension. -* + extensions make the dropdown unusable.. One way to deal with that is have + a config setting that lists what extensions to offer highlighting for. + Most people won't need/want the dozens some engines support.) +* The per page highlighters can't handle creating wiki pages from + "Makefile", or other files without a significant extension. + 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.