From: Julio M. Merino Vidal (jmmv84_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-08-01 13:09:16
On 8/1/06, John Maddock <john_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Joel de Guzman wrote:
> >> So... I added a 'cinclude' tag (standing for code include) to
> >> quickbook which, given a file, includes it in the documentation
> >> marked up (and colored!) appropriately. The implementation is
> >> attached. It can very well be flawed as it is basically a
> >> copy&paste of other parts of the code, but so far seems to work.
> >> Any chance this -- or something similar -- can be integrated?
> > Certainly. I might need to ask for some more cinclude related
> > features. Are you willing to do some more coding? Please email
> > me.
> Just a thought, but would it be better to make [include ] a phrase level
> element so it can include code or whatever, otherwise we'll end up with
> [cinclude ] and [pyinclude ] and [terminal_include ] and...... etc.
Note that cinclude stands for "code include", not "C include"; hence
the pyinclude wouldn't exist ;-)
Anyway, as Eric said it may be better to make [include] more
intelligent. What about making it take two arguments, one specifying
the file name and the other the format? E.g.
[include somefile.xml xml]
[include code.cpp c++]
[include foo.qbk quickbook]
The first one could make xinclude deprecated and the last one could be
made to avoid the 'quickbook' extra word to preserve the current
-- Julio M. Merino Vidal <jmmv84_at_[hidden]> The Julipedia - http://julipedia.blogspot.com/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk