From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Sebastien Vauban" Subject: Re: [poll] Fontify code in code blocks Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 10:05:03 +0100 Message-ID: <86iotlboow.fsf@somewhere.org> References: <86sisxz6ns.fsf@somewhere.org> <87wqi9ia0w.fsf@gmail.com> <87r48ezx8r.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87y52m7st7.fsf@gmail.com> <86mwj2g39q.fsf@somewhere.org> <87mwiy1e5e.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org To: emacs-orgmode-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org Hello Bastien, Bastien wrote: > When `org-src-fontify-natively' will be `t' by default, > it will be important to keep the distinction between source > blocks and HTML/LaTeX blocks. > > So HTML blocks should remain unfontified by default, just > to mark the difference with "active" source blocks. I can share your idea that it's good to see a difference between both types of code snippets. But, then, instead of _not_ fontifying the code in question, it'd be better (for example) to provide them with a different background color (other than the current `org-block-background', shared by both types of snippets). > I still think an option to highlight them would be nice. Ouf ;-) >> That would be the same for #+HTML/LaTeX one-liners, yes! > > For this I disagree... this would encourage using such > one-liners too much. I don't think having highlighting or not encourages one-lines: we need them (for their purpose) or not, with or without highlighting. On the contrary, not highlighting one-liners would encourage to convert them into 3-liners (if we "need" the colors): #+begin_html/latex ... one-line code ... #+end_html/latex Not sure to understand why you'd make a distinction. >> Now, I have no idea about what's the work required. But I definitely >> would love to see that implemented. > > Well, it's not hard but not straightforward -- and I'd rather > be sure that the decision is to take that route before I try to > implement this. > > Waiting to read what other think. So do I. Best regards, Seb -- Sebastien Vauban