Otfried Cheong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm not convinced it is worth the effort to rewrite a Latex parser in > emacs-lisp, though. Elisp is very good at manipulating text in > buffers, I don't think it's equally good at imitating Latex to a > larger extent. If you want a Latex parser, why not use one of the > existing ones (there is a Python parser that will give you a complete > document tree you could use as a basis for generating XML/HTML).
Can you share a pointer to this? I also know of a Perl parser: http://dlmf.nist.gov/LaTeXML/. > It > may be easier and more useful to base a new version of Hyperlatex on > such a parser than to redo everything in Elisp. I believe there is > also an existing Latex->Html converter written in Haskell. Anything you know about this would be of interest, too. I am a lisp programmer, if I'm anything, but would be interested in learning about more modern functional languages. A compiled language would introduce distribution and support issues not present with an interpreted language, though. > Finally, > tex4ht uses the Tex engine itself - the cleanest to parse TeX input, > of course. However, it's way of extracting the XML appears quite > awkward to me. tex4ht is a very strange beast, and I've never had much luck with it. -tom -- ------------------------ tomfool at as220 dot org http://sgouros.com http://whatcheer.net ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions, and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl _______________________________________________ Hyperlatex-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hyperlatex-users
