After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 725505 - new syntax highlighting for code is weird
new syntax highlighting for code is weird
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: gtk-doc
Classification: Platform
Component: general
unspecified
Other All
: Normal normal
: 1.21
Assigned To: gtk-doc maintainers
gtk-doc maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2014-03-02 16:25 UTC by Benjamin Otte (Company)
Modified: 2014-03-06 12:44 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Attachments
Update the code listing style (2.29 KB, patch)
2014-03-03 22:12 UTC, William Jon McCann
committed Details | Review
Update the code listing style (2.30 KB, patch)
2014-03-06 12:44 UTC, Stefan Sauer (gstreamer, gtkdoc dev)
committed Details | Review

Description Benjamin Otte (Company) 2014-03-02 16:25:55 UTC
I was looking at https://developer.gnome.org/gdk-pixbuf/unstable/gdk-pixbuf-File-saving.html#gdk-pixbuf-save and felt it harder than usual to read the code examples. In particular the icc profile example in that function confused me.

I tried to figure out why and here's some uneducated guesses:
- Using orange for parentheses and commas deemphasizes these symbols that bring structure too much.
- Using orange for the * and & for pointers emphasizes them, potentially too much when they are the only colored symbol in a line like the first saying "gchar *contents;"
- Using bold function names gives too much emphasis. It would be nicer to just color them differently.
- The orange used for coloring symbols is too close in color to string highlighting. My eyes think the & from the error argument belongs to the "png" string in the "gdk_pixbuf_save (pixbuf, handle, "png", &error," line.
Comment 1 William Jon McCann 2014-03-03 21:07:15 UTC
Haven't been any changes to the gtk-doc css for this recently I think. However, we are now using the gtk doc css on the webpage where we weren't before.

The style is currently:
https://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk-doc/tree/style/style.css#n296

The original style seems to come from:
https://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk-doc/commit/?id=309b01ec

I agree the coloring is over the top. In particular, the use of the symbol class.

Let's see what we can do.
Comment 2 William Jon McCann 2014-03-03 22:12:11 UTC
Created attachment 270850 [details] [review]
Update the code listing style

Something like this should help.
Comment 3 Stefan Sauer (gstreamer, gtkdoc dev) 2014-03-06 12:44:02 UTC
Thanks, looks nicer!
Comment 4 Stefan Sauer (gstreamer, gtkdoc dev) 2014-03-06 12:44:24 UTC
The following fix has been pushed:
b4e00ad Update the code listing style
Comment 5 Stefan Sauer (gstreamer, gtkdoc dev) 2014-03-06 12:44:32 UTC
Created attachment 271097 [details] [review]
Update the code listing style