Re: How to write readable source files?

From: Nicola <nvitacolonna@gmail.com>
To: ntg-context@ntg.nl
Subject: Re: How to write readable source files?
Date: Sat, 29 May 2021 18:29:15 -0000 (UTC)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <s8u15q$4nl$1@ciao.gmane.io> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d51b0499-900e-b8fb-5abe-398ddeef3edb@xs4all.nl>

On 2021-05-29, Hans Hagen <j.hagen@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> On 5/29/2021 5:03 PM, Nicola wrote:
>>> these lists are generated by mtx-interface so we can add more if needed
>>
>> Could you please elaborate on the (automatic?) data flow from ConTeXt's
>> source files to data files for each application? Is it:
>>
>> source code -> XML -> .lua -> mtx-interface -> data?
>>
>> In particular, it is not clear to me how i-*.xml files are related to
>> mtx-interface, as the latter does not use them directly, AFAICS.
>
> for sure it does

Ok, my cursory look was then… too cursory. I'll dig better.

>> Anyway, mtx-interface seems exactly what I am looking for, and I would
>> like to use it to generate ConTeXt keywords for Vim. Can I patch that
>> script?
>
> basically we only need
>
> function flushers.vim(collected)
> end

Ok.

>> For MetaFun keywords I don't know yet: do those XML files contain enough
>> information about the content of all mp-* source files? E.g., the fact
>> that `hlingrid` is a def? Looking at the Scite files, I see only
>> internals and commands, and they seem to cover only the "main" MetaFun
>> names.
>
> it is still on the agenda to make xml files for metafun but there is no
> timeline for that

So, is it correct that the XML files are automatically generated from
the source code, and kept in sync with it? If so, how is that done? Or
are they manually curated? I'd be willing to contribute to make progress
on the MetaFun part.

> just look at the files in the scite path ... much info is available, for
> context it comes from the xml files, for the tex engine and meta* it
> comes from mult* lua files

Ok, I'll look there.

> adding more detail (not sure if distinguishing between def and vardef
> makes sense ... we more use the 'primitive', 'lowlevel', 'interface'
> kind of grouping

Whatever you think is more appropriate... Provided that it can be parsed
automatically.

Nicola

___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive  : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________