From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Yuan Fu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Variable pitch mode line Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2021 15:28:40 -0800 Message-ID: <8214FF00-5C05-464C-A20D-B702FA088334@gmail.com> References: <87zgosdbo1.fsf@gnus.org> <86mtkszhnq.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87o858e5r2.fsf@gnu.org> <86fsqjcqd8.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87zgorawar.fsf@logand.com> <8B7890FE-9DFB-4282-8391-955032220234@gmail.com> <87wnjvavm2.fsf@logand.com> <87r1a3aubt.fsf@logand.com> <87o857apue.fsf@logand.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.40.0.1.81\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="23427"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Tassilo Horn , Lars Ingebrigtsen , Emacs developers , Juri Linkov To: Tomas Hlavaty Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 24 00:29:34 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1n0XWf-0005ts-IZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 24 Dec 2021 00:29:33 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48550 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n0XWd-0001bH-IE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 23 Dec 2021 18:29:31 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:39378) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n0XVv-0000um-4M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Dec 2021 18:28:47 -0500 Original-Received: from [2607:f8b0:4864:20::1033] (port=52905 helo=mail-pj1-x1033.google.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n0XVt-0008RB-EE; Thu, 23 Dec 2021 18:28:46 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-pj1-x1033.google.com with SMTP id co15so6187629pjb.2; Thu, 23 Dec 2021 15:28:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=xEWalYzuWkLJ3eelquqDXjhtlfyHYKx8khpROFvr5y8=; b=o7HeGwFVRmVS5quGNjFbpquMvvu5ocwU+z8KYSsO1o4QNYiVgeRGN/rhfyaaAzvHfl npqNGnokdAiQFq1J1hduep7U0tBhJI/t+PnZCcJ+mpcekK4VLPXH2BpfYKLaBTQ5DZ19 rw+bpannOARdMI+dWJs5WQujRQZv0/7kUihvMc0k+3fMAyuDEc4zO2xLb/emNUJI+mge mdjfmxCzjDWPYBaL+cvAfjABaiAJ4GYYuKG2yWYnnH/qP1B1j2KjJ96gNUFwuIJm3uDY Vr3kkCMuwb8Q8lIeaa6G0htepLpxI4tx1E1n9a59kmG9yZ7ENHKmJQG6XbpjirHKlAcB q1QQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=xEWalYzuWkLJ3eelquqDXjhtlfyHYKx8khpROFvr5y8=; b=vdPkO8i0tp/8qQrQBBMEwaQw2arLvhoUHVHIum2Xdx9MqO4xW7vGRfI6tOUW1ZbwAk XKPcaHUEocaxm6KZzrgpSPa5VICrchR/XQTfTgo48U/QkCTcGCi2MXtVpHvs2ZLfQg6S O2BXLyxEINQhHbG28agth/RlL7dYE9KdkQVPlK1EL5ZtM9R7RGJXkIrik+VwcIyEs35F zEdJvuYuqzpduHzwxD3rIs3Wttdt6pmR4l2KlsXwN7PY2v9z7Icm93hTJoVSd9HKK1XX xRfFSH0TAo7wrXHCNUGWRLVcnH7ZfmEbxy1b1gNTcDnr9LL0LRFVuPEnWYIkOk8XAwfE +ejw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5339vaCiNxAOBCxqQJP26NkB7jbrVmKaqWjWxk83ng3joVAZPKc5 Y5HmYeADJbqKgW/9tYGDDs4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyh9jj854A56lY+yuAt1/+Wy3DIwplMVnTl/TdpzcY00FdsikFNJakJCUXIpjpBtUf0F94lew== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:e5ce:b0:142:780:78db with SMTP id u14-20020a170902e5ce00b00142078078dbmr4368830plf.12.1640302122660; Thu, 23 Dec 2021 15:28:42 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2600:1700:2ec7:8c90:d149:cff8:e7a4:12f0]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f16sm8020074pfj.6.2021.12.23.15.28.41 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 23 Dec 2021 15:28:42 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87o857apue.fsf@logand.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.40.0.1.81) X-Host-Lookup-Failed: Reverse DNS lookup failed for 2607:f8b0:4864:20::1033 (failed) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::1033; envelope-from=casouri@gmail.com; helo=mail-pj1-x1033.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -12 X-Spam_score: -1.3 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:283052 Archived-At: > On Dec 23, 2021, at 3:00 PM, Tomas Hlavaty wrote: >=20 > On Thu 23 Dec 2021 at 13:41, Yuan Fu wrote: >>> On Dec 23, 2021, at 1:24 PM, Tomas Hlavaty wrote: >>> On Thu 23 Dec 2021 at 13:00, Yuan Fu wrote: >>>>> On Dec 23, 2021, at 12:56 PM, Tomas Hlavaty = wrote: >>>>> On Thu 23 Dec 2021 at 12:51, Yuan Fu wrote: >>>>>> I=E2=80=99ve tried that. Info files are not complex, but they = can=E2=80=99t be >>>>>> reliably parsed 100% of the time. My code works for like 95% of = the >>>>>> nodes, but there are always some corner cases where it breaks. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Why doesn't texinfo html output suffer from this problem? >>>>=20 >>>> HTML are structured, where as Info is more like plain text. Just to >>>> give an example, in an info file, four spaces indent text could be = a >>>> code block, or just an indented paragraph, there is no way telling >>>> them apart. In HTML, code is wrapped in (or maybe 
),
>>>> paragraphs are wrapped in 
.
>>>=20
>>> Sorry for not being clearer.
>>> The question is not about the difference between info and html.
>>>=20
>>> The question is: why does your info to html conversion attempt work =
in
>>> 95% cases but textinfos info to html conversion work in 100% cases?
>>=20
>> So I guess your question is about the difference between info and
>> texinfo? Texinfo is also structured, makeinfo can parse a texinfo =
file
>> (you probably already know that). Info files are, as I said, not
>> structured and can=E2=80=99t be reliably parsed to code blocks, =
paragraphs,
>> function definitions, etc. Hence my code only works 95% of the
>> time. Also I=E2=80=99m not converting info files to html files, I=E2=80=
=99m just
>> parsing info files and trying to fontify it. Here is the code, maybe
>> that can explain better than my words. (I know it=E2=80=99s name =
conflicts
>> with another well-know package, it=E2=80=99s only used by myself and =
not
>> published.)
>=20
> I see, textinfo does not use info files for html conversion (it uses
> texi files) and the conversion from texi to info looses important
> information, is that right?

Yes.

>=20
> btw, for example in slime.info, I see paragraphs delimited with empty
> line.  Also 3 spaces for indenting paragraphs and 5 spaces for code.  =
Is
> that not always the case?

Yes. But sometimes paragraphs are indented to 5 spaces, and we can=E2=80=99=
t tell if its code or paragraph. I don=E2=80=99t remember concert cases, =
but maybe a list in a paragraph, which indents more than the paragraph =
it is in. There are other breakages, of course. If you enable =
info-pretty-mode in info+.el and try to use it for a while, eventually =
you will encounter some breakage. In my case, I encountered some =
breakages and have no way to fix them. There is just not enough =
information.

Yuan