Re: [PATCH 1/2] Documentation: sphinx: Add sphinx-prompt

[Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>]

On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 07:41:39AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Youtube references aren't a great way to explain the value of a patch;
> you'll find that maintainers will, in general, lack the time or
> inclination to follow them up.  The patch should explain itself.

I agree that the way this has been presented is awful.

> > prompt:: bash $ is clearly readable that this is prompt documentation
> > in fact, dropping the "$" in the example logs, one can easily copy paste
> > the documentation from rst files as well.
> 
> .. prompt:: is clutter.  It also adds a bit of extra cognitive load to
> reading that part of the documentation.
> 
> Quick copy-paste of multiple lines of privileged shell commands has
> never really been a requirement for the kernel docs; why do we need that
> so badly?
> 
> I appreciate attempts to improve our documentation, and hope that you
> will continue to do so.  I am far from convinced, though, that this
> change clears the bar for mainline inclusion.

I'd ask that you reconsider.  Looking at patch 2, I prefer what is
written there.  I don't think it adds cognitive load when reading the
plain docs.  I find the "copy and paste from html" argument not very
convincing, but I do like "copy and paste from rst", which this enables.

I also have a certain fond memory of how the plan9 people set up 'rc'
(their shell) so that ";" was both an empty statement, and the default
prompt.  So you could copy-paste lines starting with the ; prompt and
they'd work.  It's a small usabillity improvement, but it is there,
and wow is it annoying when you don't have it any more.