Last modified: 2012-09-19 17:00:58 UTC
Please write a new syntax highlighting extension which uses Pygments instead of GeSHi. *GeSHi is showing it's age *Pygments produces nicer highlighting in many cases *Pygments is actively developed, and ever so much trendier (just look at the purty webpage!)
Pygments is written in Python, while MediaWiki in PHP. A monster that will combine the two pieces, apparently by execing a Python interpreter, is not an option for sites of any reasonable size for performance reasons. How do you suggest to overcome this?
(In reply to comment #0) > *GeSHi is showing it's age > *Pygments is actively developed, and ever so much trendier (just look at the > purty webpage!) What makes you think that? I have quite an opposite impression of Geshi and its development activity.
(In reply to comment #1) > How do you suggest to overcome this? I have no idea, I am not writing it. If you think it is a bad idea, then you could just close this.
(In reply to comment #1) > Pygments is written in Python, while MediaWiki in PHP. A monster that will > combine the two pieces, apparently by execing a Python interpreter, is not an > option for sites of any reasonable size for performance reasons. How do you > suggest to overcome this? There's now a bridge that overcomes this issue, called Pygments for PHP ( http://derek.simkowiak.net/pygments-for-php/ ). Given that a Wordpress extension has successfully been made using it, perhaps this is now a viable request?
As far as I can see pygmentize() is just launching the python interpreter behind the scenes.(In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #1) > > Pygments is written in Python, while MediaWiki in PHP. A monster that will > > combine the two pieces, apparently by execing a Python interpreter, is not an > > option for sites of any reasonable size for performance reasons. How do you > > suggest to overcome this? > > There's now a bridge that overcomes this issue, called Pygments for PHP ( > http://derek.simkowiak.net/pygments-for-php/ ). Given that a Wordpress > extension has successfully been made using it, perhaps this is now a viable > request? That bridge only does what was written above: "execing a Python interpeter".
