This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: style of code examples in changes.html
- From: David Malcolm <dmalcolm at redhat dot com>
- To: Martin Sebor <msebor at gmail dot com>, Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>, GCC Mailing List <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:55:48 -0400
- Subject: Re: style of code examples in changes.html
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Mon, 2018-04-16 at 20:34 -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> Hi David & Gerald,
(sorry for the late response; I was offline on vacation last week)
> I noticed that the coding examples in the updates I committed
> to changes.html use a different formatting style than David's.
> I just copied mine from GCC 7 changes.html, and those I copied
> from David's for that version :)
There are at least two kinds of example in the website:
(a) source code examples, and
(b) "screenshots" of gcc output, which can themselves contain code
output as part of a diagnostic.
I got sick of hand-converting (b) to our HTML tags, so I wrote a script
to do it, which I used for my gcc-8/changes.html.
The script is in the website's CVS repository as:
and can be run like this:
gcc $@ \
-fdiagnostics-color=always 2>&1 \
I also added a
around the output, though this isn't done by the above script.
I actually had a fair bit more scripting than this, based on the
scripting I did for my blogpost here:
where lines like:
in a foo.html.in get turned into a "screenshot" of the pertinent gcc
invocation in the foo.html. But given that we don't want to require
running gcc itself to build the website (and indeed, specific gcc
versions), I just used this to generate the patch.
> Should we make an effort to
> make them all look the same?
Naturally, for (b), I favor the new style I used :) (using the black
background, which may be enough to get the same look).
I'm not sure if we want to use it for (a).
> FWIW, I didn't notice the difference until my changes published.
> I'm guessing that's because the style sheet the page uses isn't
> referenced from the original document and the reference is only
> added by Gerald's script. Is there a simple way to set things
> up so we can see our changes as they will appear when published?
I've been adding these lines to the <head> of the page:
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" />
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../gcc.css" />
while testing the content.
Hope this is helpful