From: Benja F. <b.f...@gm...> - 2002-12-24 20:33:09
|
Hi Bill-- Bill Bumgarner wrote: > On Tuesday, Dec 24, 2002, at 08:42 US/Eastern, Benja Fallenstein wrote: > >> Hiya, >> >> Bill Bumgarner wrote: >> >>> I understand that :: basically leads to a literal block, but I don't >>> see anything that causes a parsed-literal to be used instead? >> >> IIRC parsed-literal is a directive, so, >> >> .. parsed-literal:: >> <something> >> >> (where the 'something' is indented, in case my stupid mailer messes >> that up again :-( ) > > > Right. Got it. That works great. > > But it looks ugly-- it is the first intrusive formatting command I > have had to include in the documents. Feature request; maybe if a > paragraph ends in :;, the following block is a parsed literal as > opposed to a literal block? IMHO that wouldn't be worth it-- I don't see this as something used by many users, and it is hackish anyway, because it messes up the alignment of lines-- if I write a UML diagram as ASCII art, I'd have to write: +---------+ | *MyClass* | +---------+ to put the "MyClass" in italics (at least, as far as I understand parsed-literal I have to) for showing that it is an abstract class. Also, I may have to escape asterisks etc. in the code. So, I don't think it is generally useful enough to warrant its own syntax... Just my two cents, of course. - Benja |