Re: Fwd: [PATCH] different approach to --split html

[janneke]

"Eli Zaretskii" <address@hidden> writes:

> > A shame that development not open, then.  We could (almost) have used
> > that!
> 
> I don't see how is this related to the development model.  That
> program was written for a specific project, back when Texinfo didn't
> yet have the --html option, and its source is freely available.

Ok, sorry.  I assumed that by ``working program'' you meant a
development version of makeinfo, and that had made duplicate efforts.
Sure, if you'd redo makeinfo in python, scheme (or, ugh, perl, if
you've got a strong stomach), these things will be fairly easy.

> > I'd say requiring an extra pass is pretty bad?
> 
> Given that we already do that, I can't say I agree.
> 
> Single-pass operation contradicts several important features (and is a
> reason for some extremely hairy code), and I wouldn't recommend giving
> up on those features just to save another pass.  Today's machines are
> quite fast.

Well, I guess we disagree on this.  Afaics, texinfo was designed to be
one pass, and makeinfo too.  I don't know what these ``features'' are,
but given that they were add-ons, and thus non-essential, they require
an extra pass, and give lead to ugly code, I would have been very
reluctant to add them, as long as makeinfo is written in C.

Greetings,
Jan.

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien       | http://www.lilypond.org