Phil Dobbin <[email protected]> a écrit: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 12/04/2012 06:17, Paul Isambert wrote: > > > Phil Dobbin <[email protected]> a écrit: > > >> On 10/04/2012 22:01, Andre Majorel wrote: > >> > >>> On 2012-04-10 18:37 +0100, Phil Dobbin wrote: > >>> > >>>> Putting the documents (manual & reference) into tex I think > >>>> is the best way to go & will result in a much better looking > >>>> final PDF from which to print. > >>> > >>> What do you have in mind ? > >>> > >>> If you just put all the text in a giant monospace verbatim, it > >>> won't be much better (or worse) that the output of vimpspp. > >>> Page breaks and page numbering may be easier, though. > >>> > >>> If you intend to reflow the text, there is much to gain. But > >>> then you need to know what is, in HTML parlance, <pre>, what is > >>> <code> and what is neither. Dunno how easy/hard that is. > >>> > >>> In any case, it's essential that the process be as automated as > >>> possible. EG, program reads /usr/share/vim/vim*/doc/ and spits > >>> out {man,ref}.ps. Otherwise, the files will always lag behind. > >> > >> > >> Well, I have this crazy idea of taking the plain text files, > >> flowing them into markdown, then converting them into tex to be > >> typeset & then generating a PDF ready for print. > >> > >> All perfectly possible using Pandoc, Vim & Lulu, just a question > >> of how viable it is. > >> > >> Any thoughts appreciated. > > > > If you're willing to use the latest engine LuaTeX instead of TeX, > > I have written a package called Interpreter whose job is to > > translate input files on the fly before TeX reads them (but during > > the TeX compilation, it is not a preprocessor, LuaTeX lets you do > > that). The obvious application (and actually, my motivation) is to > > be able to write source files without TeX's \commands and > > \what{ever} (I haven't used those for quite some time now); feeding > > the Vim's manual directly to TeX that way is something I'd been > > thinking about, but never done. The problem I fear is that the > > syntax isn't unambiguous, but it'd be worth giving it a try. > > > Hi, Paul. > > Yes, I'd be very interested in trying that. I have LuaTex installed > alongside Tex & texlive on both my production & development boxes > (Debian for Prod, OS X for devel). > > I don't know everybody else's opinions on the subject but we could > set-up a GitHub repository maybe to try the ideas out. I'm amenable to > any suggestions. > > Let me know what you think.
For the GitHub repository, I have absolutely no experience in that, so I have no idea either. Otherwise, if we're going to use Interpreter, then the first step would be a description of the syntax of the Vim manual, so that I can start writing an ``interpretation file'' (which gives the translation between the input and the TeX output) as required by the package. Best, Paul -- You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
