Re: no syntax highlighting for code blocks with org-publish

[M. Pger]

Thanks for your suggestion. I added the following:

#+begin_src elisp :eval no :exports code
  (setq my-var "org mailing list")
  (message "Hello, %s" my-var)
#+end_src

When exported with ~C-c C-e h o~, syntax highlighting is implemented (with 
colors). When exported with org-publish interestingly I have no color, but 
=setq= is in bold. Would it be possible that ox-publish implements some kind of 
really basic builtin syntax highlighting and ignores htmlize?


------- Original Message -------
On Monday, July 18th, 2022 at 11:50 PM, Tim Cross <theophilusx@gmail.com> wrote:


> "M. Pger" mpger@protonmail.com writes:
>
> > Thank you for your answer. Here it is:
> >
> > 1. Create the following directory structure (3 directories):
> > ~/test/
> > ├── content
> > ├── html
> > └── .packages
> >
> > 2. Create the .el script to build the website (=~/test/build.el=):
> >
> > #+begin_src elisp
> > ;; * Set the package installation directory (in order not to overwrite the 
> > standard ~/emacs.d)
> > (require 'package)
> > (setq package-user-dir (expand-file-name "./.packages"))
> > (setq package-archives '(("melpa" . "https://melpa.org/packages/";)))
> > (add-to-list 'package-archives '("elpa" . "https://elpa.gnu.org/packages/";))
> >
> > ;; * Initialize the package system
> > (package-initialize)
> > (unless package-archive-contents
> > (package-refresh-contents))
> >
> > ;; * Install dependencies
> > ;; ** since org is builtin, by default Emacs does not try to install the 
> > latest version from Elpa (9.5.4)
> > ;; the following solves the issue:
> > (defun mpger-ignore-builtin (pkg)
> > (assq-delete-all pkg package--builtins)
> > (assq-delete-all pkg package--builtin-versions))
> > (mpger-ignore-builtin 'org)
> > ;; ** install packages:
> > (package-install 'org)
> > (package-install 'htmlize)
> >
> > ;; * Load the publishing system:
> > (require 'org)
> > (require 'htmlize)
> > (require 'ox-publish)
> >
> > ;; * Define the project
> > (setq org-publish-project-alist
> > (list
> > (list "pages"
> > :recursive t
> > :htmlized-source t
> > :base-directory "./content/"
> > :base-extension "org"
> > :publishing-directory "./html/"
> > :publishing-function 'org-html-publish-to-html
> > :with-creator t
> > :with-toc t
> > :section-numbers nil
> > :time-stamp-file nil)
> > ))
> >
> > ;; * Generate the site output
> > (org-publish-all t)
> >
> > (message "Done!")
> > #+end_src
> >
> > 3. In =~/test/content/=, create a simple test.org file to be published as 
> > html (=~/test/content/test.org=):
> >
> > #+begin_example
> > * Here's some text
> >
> > Lorem ipsum.
> >
> > * Here's some code
> >
> > #+begin_src R :results output :exports both
> > df <- mtcars ## a comment
> > library(parallel)
> > #+end_src
> >
> > #+end_example
> >
> > 4. Run =~/test/build.el= (e.g. with ~emacs -Q --script ~/test/build.el~) 
> > and compare with
> > the output from ~C-c C-e h o~. The latter has syntax highlighting, the 
> > former has not.
>
>
> Just a shot in the dark. Does syntax highlighting work if the source
> block is something like emacs-lisp rather than R?
>
> I know that syntax highlighting is based on the syntax highlighting from
> the mode used for a specific language. I'm wondering if your not getting
> syntax highlighting because in yhour publish script, R mode is not
> loaded, but when you open the org file and do a 'normal' export, R is
> loaded and so you get syntax highlighting. Therefore, I would try the
> same experiment, but instead of a source block of R code, I would try a
> source block of emacs-lisp code as we know that emacs-lisp mode will be
> loaded.
>
> Could be completely off track though!