Hi Georg,

Looks like you made it through exams and are hard back at work on
Sphinx. Is there any chance the feature discussed below can make it
into 0.5? Do I need to log it somewhere else as a feature request?

Bob

On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 8:36 AM, Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Bob Tolbert schrieb:
>> I'd like to offer a suggestion for an enhancement to cmdoption. I find
>> that I need to document multiple, small programs in the same document.
>> And many of them have a common option like "-in".
>>
>> The current method will cause a clash if the two are defined in the
>> same .rst file. Fine, I can put them in separate files, but when it
>> comes time to reference or index these options, they don't work as
>> expected.
>>
>> I'd like to suggest an additional keyword, much like ".. module::",
>> say ".. program:: foo" that sets the "current" program that all
>> options are members of. Then references could be :option:`foo-in`
>> instead of just :option:`-in`. This will remove the ambiguity. And if
>> the "..program:: foo"  is never set, then the current behavior is
>> unchanged.
>
> This is a good idea. I will try to implement it in Sphinx 0.5.
>
> Georg
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sphinx-dev" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sphinx-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to