Re: [Docutils-develop] Figure references

[David G. <go...@us...>]

Engelbert, would you please add some blank lines before & after your
comments?  It's difficult to notice your comments without them.

> (i know one might "pass" everything that is not working,
>  but i am still not sure what writers do in all the places,
>  e.g. see docinfo handling in latex_writer)

I don't see the problem.  It should be easy to put in a simple
catch-all method for unimplemented nodes.  Just make sure it doesn't
act (or not act) silently.  If you're not sure what should be done,
say so explicitly.

> or if i might dare i start making_a_writer.txt in some place
> you like and put in what i know and what i donot know ?

Yes, that would be most welcome.  I see that you've already started;
great!

> i donot want to remove test.txt, but maybe split it so when working
> on a feature i can use *the* test-tables.txt file, not do it myself
> everytime. and test.txt is the concatenation of all the test-*.txt
> files.

I see what you're saying now.  Incremental testing is definitely
useful; that's how the Docutils test suite works.  The parser would
never have been completed without many small unittests (now at 518
tests!).

If you'd like to make up a bunch of small document fragments for test
purposes, go ahead.  Perhaps in a new docutils/test/fragments
directory.

>> As I've said before, to get out of the sandbox the LaTeX Writer
>> doesn't have to handle every construct perfectly, but it *does* have
>> to handle every construct without (a) crashing or (b) silently
>> omitting data.  If the Writer can't handle a particular construct,
>> have it say so explicitly ("**X Not Implemented Yet**"), *and* have it
>> output a simpler form, such as the string returned by the
>> ``.astext()`` node method.  I earlier objected to the presence of many
>> Writer/Visitor methods containing only "pass", which is not
>> acceptable.
>>
>>     Errors should never pass silently.
>>     Unless explicitly silenced.
>
> agree absolutely. but it would make life easier if someone really
> needs the features (xp-wise nothing would be done otherwise),
> because the "customer" is a reviewer with high interest.

I don't understand what you mean.

-- 
David Goodger  <go...@us...>  Open-source projects:
  - Python Docutils: http://docutils.sourceforge.net/
    (includes reStructuredText: http://docutils.sf.net/rst.html)
  - The Go Tools Project: http://gotools.sourceforge.net/