Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Code examples

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org, Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Code examples
Date: 2007-09-04 14:36:40
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-docspgsql-hackers
Tom Lane escribió:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > Am Dienstag, 4. September 2007 02:39 schrieb Tom Lane:
> >> C code that's been hacked until it passes for SGML isn't compilable.
> > I don't understand this point.  Why would SGML care what the C code looks 
> > like?
> &, <, and > need to be hacked so that SGML doesn't barf on them.
> Unfortunately, all three symbols are a bit commonplace in C code.

Maybe we could set things up so that there are actual files which are
programatically preprocessed to SGML to be included in the docs?  That
way, the docs always reflect the actual file, which by itself is
compilable.  The SGML source would only contain something like
<include file="examples/foo.c" /> or something like that.

Is that feasible?

Alvaro Herrera       
"No necesitamos banderas
 No reconocemos fronteras"                  (Jorge Gonz√°lez)

In response to


pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2007-09-04 15:04:08
Subject: Re: Code examples
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-09-04 14:11:30
Subject: Re: Code examples

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Hiroshi SaitoDate: 2007-09-04 14:42:25
Subject: Re: Has anyone tried out the PL/pgSQL debugger?
Previous:From: Guillaume LelargeDate: 2007-09-04 14:33:05
Subject: Re: Has anyone tried out the PL/pgSQL debugger?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group