Re: enriched mode?
"Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote:
>>>>> "Vaclav" == Vaclav Barta
<vbar(a)comp.cz> writes:
Vaclav> OK, I don't have to use [enriched] either, but what do I
Vaclav> do when I want to add a sentence (to a source code file)
Vaclav> in red, so that it stands out? Or strike out a word?
This will depend on the language you're working with. But I'd say
that given that you apparently have a captive audience, enriched text
Well,
it's not so much a captive audience as a thought experiment -
quite possibly nothing will ever come out of it... Anyway, it has been
suggested to me to use PowerPoint presentations - I don't think I can do
worse than that... :-)
is a reasonable place to start. You obviously can't use XML or
something like that, since that requires to file to globally parse as
XML.
Right.
One alternative would be to define a special comment syntax for
in-house use, such as
/*r An important comment. */
/*s really_bogus_function_call(); */
flags the first comment in red and strikes through the really bogus
function call. I believe that you can pretty easily arrange for
font-lock to pick that up in a different face from comment-face. This
But can
comments be nested? I want to comment on the comments, too...
would allow such code to actually compile. There's no good way I
can
think of to attach special markup to live code in a file, unless you
don't care if it compiles---in this case, enriched looks like a pretty
No, I
don't care - the live code is killed for dissection... :-) I would
prefer the diffs (between the original vs. annotated version and between
different annotated versions) to look nice, though...
Vaclav> Basically, is XEmacs a word processor?
No, but you can make it into one if you work hard enough. :-/
I'll think about
it... :-)
Bye
Vasek