Re: Marking lisp expressions

[Jean-Christophe Helary]

> On Jan 28, 2020, at 9:02, Karl Berry <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
>    To create the dvi/ps/pdf output it requires a TeX installation,
>    which is an order of magnitude bigger than Emacs.
> 
> A TeX installation which is just plain TeX, enough to process Texinfo
> files (not LaTeX), is somewhat smaller than current Emacs.
> (scheme-minimal in native TeX Live.) -k

Thank you for the information.

I was replying to Gavin's "makeinfo is not part of Emacs" as a reason to not 
use Emacs facilities. makeinfo is neither part of TeX and still uses it as a 
dependency.

Also, as writen in the manual, makeinfo does not install the TeX subsystem and 
there is no indication regarding what the minimum requirement is, just a link 
to "texlive". Emacs is mentionned all over the manual and since info manuals 
are only a requirement for the Gnu system it is unlikely that texinfo 
writers/makeinfo users don't have a copy of emacs on their machines.

Just like "Formating and Printing Hardcopy" indicates the TeX requirement, 
"Generating HTML" could have a "syntax highlighting" subsection that indicates 
the emacs requirement.

I understand that the solution I proposed is seemingly not "elegant": hand 
marking the elements of code samples (although marking can be automated with 
regex, and marking by itself is a comon enough task when authoring HTML and the 
like), relying on emacs > htmlfontify, but it hardly can be considered a hack 
since the tools exist, are stable and their use is documented in the emacs 
manual.

But maybe Gavin was thinking about having syntax highlighting for all the 
output formats that support color output ?


Jean-Christophe Helary
-----------------------------------------------
http://mac4translators.blogspot.com @brandelune