[Doc-SIG] directive for flexible literate programming support?

[Frank Siebenlist]

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