Re: [Structuredtext-develop] Re: wanting to use restructuredtext in a zope product
Status: Pre-Alpha
Brought to you by:
goodger
|
From: tav <ta...@es...> - 2002-04-12 09:16:19
|
>>>>> DG == "David Goodger" <go...@us...> wrote:
DG> I think I'll keep the document parts separate to some
DG> extent, within the Writer object, but leave the access
DG> up to client subclasses.
ah, nice plan.
tav> i simply added a couple of returns in core.py and [snip]
DG> I looked over them, and I think you can simplify life greatly
DG> if you rethink your approach. Instead of inserting "return"
DG> statements all over the place, take advantage of the
DG> interface, which allows for three types of "destination":
DG> (a) a file-like object, which is written directly;
DG> (b) a path to a file, which is opened and then written; or
DG> (c) `None`, which implies `sys.stdout`.
DG> You can get a return value by passing a file-like object as
DG> in (a). A StringIO object would do the trick.
i appreciate the interface, and in fact using a tempfile or a stringio
object was how i was going to approach it inittially. however, it seemed
like pointless overhead, given my singular application.
DG> I may rethink the interface so you don't need
DG> StringIO, but not the way you've outlined:
could you elaborate on how you see it working without a file-like object?
and, re the way that i have done it. please pay no heed. it was a quick hack
for my needs, and i wasn't suggesting that such a crude approach be taken in
the codebase.
tav> can restx not adapt such a practise?
DG> No! Or at least, not by me!
you seem pretty set on this point... can you at least accomodate for a
decode() method in the XHTMLTransformer class?
tav> the anchor tag is very problematic, as:
tav> [snip : example]
DG> All kinds of special-casing would have to be done,
DG> and the result would be a quagmire of ambiguity.
hmz. how could i go about disabling protocol recognition then? i.e.
conversion of http://foo.com into a url.
thanks btw.
--
best regards, tav
ta...@es...
|