From: Deane Yang (deane_yang_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-12-12 22:39:02
David Abrahams wrote:
> Deane Yang <deane_yang_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> David Abrahams wrote:
>>> Lots of reasons: easier installation, I happen to know it really well
>>> since we wrote C++TMP in it, more sensible parsing rules, I have
>>> complete and working emacs syntax coloring (makes a huge difference),
>>> shorter toolchain, a great path to PDFs (please don't say "FOP").
>> Are all of these things already available in boost somewhere?
> I don't understand what you mean. What things?
You answered this pretty well below, but what about the emacs mode for
rst? Is that available somewhere?
> That's the path. 'Till now I've used a Makefile for that purpose, but
> only because I haven't had the time to set up BBv2 to generate pdfs;
> it would probaby be easy. See
> for a hint ;-)
Thanks. I'll take a look.
>> I just found docutils.jam, but I'm not sure whether I have to do
>> anything special to make sure that the docutils scripts are found.
> If your docutils is installed (e.g. in your Python's site-packages),
> it's just
> using docutils ;
> but I think I only ever wrote RST->HTML support in docutils.jam.
Yes, I did see that only RST->HTML was implemented. But that's way
better than nothing. Thank you very much.