[Orgmode] Re: How to get pretty printed source code in PDFLaTeX

[Dan Davison]

"Thomas S. Dye" <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi Dan,
>
> One of the design goals of LaTeX is to use semantic markup in the
> source and to keep details of representation separate, typically in a
> style or class file that is used to render the semantic markup.  From
> this perspective, the cleanest implementation would be to create a
> LaTeX style or class file for use with org-mode, where the gory
> details of listings vs. minted, etc.

Yes, although may I repeat that in the case of minted there are no gory
details. The patch I submitted already works to give org users
out-of-the-box pretty fontified code with nothing more required than
installation of pygments and putting minted.sty in a suitable
place. Pending the work on listings that you and Seb and I are
proposing, the minted patch is therefore a useful advance for org
mode. It can always be removed later if it becomes clear that it is
completely redundant in view of newly improved org/listings support.

But yes, absolutely, what you say is definitely helpful for those
planning work on improving listings support.

Dan

> could be worked out.  This would
> leave org-mode to do what it does very well, which is to identify and
> mark the relevant semantic units, and would at the same time simplify
> org-mode configuration.
>
> For the user, this would require the org-mode.sty or org-mode.cls file
> be placed somewhere LaTeX could find it and creating an export target
> for it in .emacs.
>
> This might not qualify as "out of the box" but the looser coupling
> between org-mode and LaTeX is likely to be a plus in the long run.
>
> All the best,
> Tom
>
> On Aug 9, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Dan Davison wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Sébastien Vauban <wxhgmqzgwmuf-geNee64TY+gS
>> address@hidden>
>> writes:
>>
>>> Hi Dan,
>>>
>>> Dan Davison wrote:
>>>> Sébastien Vauban
>>>> <wxhgmqzgwmuf-geNee64TY+gS+FvcfC7Uqw-XMD5yJDbdMSQIYZ4X/address@hidden
>>>> > writes:
>>>>> Sebastian Rose wrote:
>>>>>> Dan Davison <address@hidden>
>>>>>> writes:
>>>>>>> Can you point me to an example that shows how to make source
>>>>>>> code in
>>>>>>> latex look (almost) as nice as html?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is supposed to work with the `listings' package. I havent
>>>>>> tried that
>>>>>> yet.
>>>>>
>>>>> If I understand you right, here's such an example you're after:
>>>>>
>>>>> * Much better code
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>>> I've put the PDF (for easy access) onto my Web site:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.mygooglest.com/sva/ECM-Listings.pdf
>>>>
>>>> Wow, that's really nice. Thanks for sharing that.
>>>
>>> I really thought that you used such a thing for a long time, having
>>> done so
>>> much for Org-Babel. Maybe you were more interested by the execution
>>> stuff,
>>> rather than its printing? For me, the opposite: I was much
>>> interested by the
>>> printing, now by accessing all the power of Babel.
>>
>> You're probably right that I should have looked into it. But seeing as
>> the HTML export of code is so nice and requred no configuration, I
>> never
>> got round to it. Although I did write my Ph.D. in latex, and I am
>> enjoying using the listings package for formatting pseudocode in a
>> paper
>> which I'm supposed to be writing, I do need to become better friends
>> with latex, it's true.
>>
>>>> I think we should aim to get to a point where org-mode can produce
>>>> such
>>>> nicely formatted source code out-of-the-box.
>>>
>>> I share your point. I'm willing to participate, or even begin, such
>>> a page on
>>> Worg, with the above info.
>>>
>>>> Maybe we could even make latex inherit the colours and fonts that
>>>> emacs is
>>>> currently using for source code mark up?
>>>
>>> For sure, that'd be nice. You mean the way htmlize works, and keeps
>>> my colors,
>>> right?
>>>
>>> Dunno what it implies for Org-LaTeX... Generating your own class
>>> customization,
>>> and having it loaded by default (in the list of LaTeX packages)?
>>
>> Usage of listings is controlled by the variable
>> `org-export-latex-listings', so the simplest start would be: if that
>> is
>> non-nil then code like yours could be inserted into the latex output.
>>
>>>
>>>> I was going to suggest doing this with listings but then came
>>>> across minted,
>>>> and I wonder whether that's even more suitable? (See the other
>>>> post I just
>>>> made.)
>>>
>>> Never heard about it before, while I'm trying to follow info about
>>> TeX as
>>> well.
>>>
>>> I'm very impressed by the quality and reaction time of
>>> french.computers.text.tex. So, I decided to ask them what they
>>> thought about
>>> Listings vs Minted.
>>
>> ,----
>> | "sur un post de Dan Davison parlant d'un nouveau paquet qui
>> | serait mieux que Listings."
>> `----
>>
>> Hey, I never said that! :)
>>
>> I said it might be better *for export of code from org-mode*. But
>> seriously, no problem, in addition to my character assassination, from
>> what I could make out they made lots of good points. Although I will
>> watch out now if I come across any francophones who look like they
>> might
>> be tex enthusiasts (wouldn't one always...)
>>
>> What I meant is that seeing as org-users who set
>> `org-export-latex-listings' get black and white code with ugly fonts
>> by
>> default, there are two improvement options for us:
>>
>> 1. we work on incorporating nice listings configuration into org
>> mode so
>>   that Org users get nice colours and fonts by default
>> 2. we add an option to allow Org users to use the minted package,
>> which
>>   gives them nice colours and fonts automatically.
>>
>> (2) was easy and so I did it straight away. And (1) is still something
>> we want to do, not least because listings is in standard latex
>> distributions and doesn't have an extra python requirement. Assuming
>> that minted/pygments are stable software that will be around for a
>> while, I would vote for both options ultimately being available in
>> org-mode.
>>
>>>
>>> See on
>>> [[http://groups.google.com/groups/search?as_umsgid%3D87lj8gp4rr.fsf%40mundaneum.com
>>> ][Email from Sébastien Vauban: Listings vs Minted]]
>>>
>>> What's interesting is that 2 brilliant people of that list
>>> responded on that.
>>> I could try to translate the whole, but there already is a lot. Just
>>> highlighting that they don't trust that much all the facts that
>>> have been used
>>> against Listings (and prove what they say): about Utf-8, or the
>>> number of
>>> languages, etc.
>>>
>>> They agree with one inconvenient of Listings: the fact that, by
>>> default, it
>>> uses bad settings (like no color, and proportional font).
>>>
>>> On the other hand, they don't like implying the use of an external
>>> language to
>>> LaTeX. Impacts on shell-escape.
>>>
>>> The discussion is going on. I'll keep you posted.
>>>
>>> For sure, the objective of getting better out-of-the-box is a goal
>>> we can
>>> reach.
>>
>> Excellent, I think that will be a good addition to org-mode.
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>  Seb
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
>> Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
>> address@hidden
>> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode