Commit 38e633d49b (fish_vi_key_bindings: add support for count,
2025-12-16) introduced an operator mode which kind of makes a lot of
sense for today's fish. If we end up needing more flexibility and
tighter integration, we might want to move some of this into core.
Unfortunately the change is at odds with our cursed forward-jump
implementation. The forward-jump special input function works by
magically reading the next key from stdin, which causes problems when
we are executing a script:
commandline -f begin-selection
commandline -f forward-jump
commandline -f end-selection
here end-selection will be executed immediately
and forward-jump fails to wait for a keystroke.
We should get rid of forward-jump implementation.
For now, replace only the broken thing with a dedicated bind mode
for each of f/F/t/T.
Fixes#12417
No need to define "cmd-foo" anchors; use :doc:`foo <cmds/foo>`
instead. If we want "cmd-foo" but it should be tested.
See also 38b24c2325 (docs: Use :doc: role when linking to commands,
2022-09-23).
This makes it so we link to the very top of the document instead of a
special anchor we manually include.
So clicking e.g. :doc:`string <cmds/string>` will link you to
cmds/string.html instead of cmds/string.html#cmd-string.
I would love to have a way to say "this document from the root of the
document path", but that doesn't appear to work, I tried
`/cmds/string`.
So we'll just have to use cmds/string in normal documents and plain
`string` from other commands.
Recent synopsis changes move from literal code blocks to
[RST line blocks]. This does not translate well to HTML: it's not
rendered in monospace, so aligment is lost. Additionally, we don't
get syntax highlighting in HTML, which adds differences to our code
samples which are highlighted.
We hard-wrap synopsis lines (like code blocks). To align continuation
lines in manpages we need [backslashes in weird places]. Combined with
the **, *, and `` markup, it's a bit hard to get the alignment right.
Fix these by moving synopsis sources back to code blocks and compute
HTML syntax highlighting and manpage markup with a custom Sphinx
extension.
The new Pygments lexer can tokenize a synopsis and assign the various
highlighting roles, which closely matches fish's syntax highlighing:
- command/keyword (dark blue)
- parameter (light blue)
- operator like and/or/not/&&/|| (cyan)
- grammar metacharacter (black)
For manpage output, we don't project the fish syntax highlighting
but follow the markup convention in GNU's man(1):
bold text type exactly as shown.
italic text replace with appropriate argument.
To make it easy to separate these two automatically, formalize that
(italic) placeholders must be uppercase; while all lowercase text is
interpreted literally (so rendered bold).
This makes manpages more consistent, see string-join(1) and and(1).
Implementation notes:
Since we want manpage formatting but Sphinx's Pygments highlighing
plugin does not support manpage output, add our custom "synopsis"
directive. This directive parses differently when manpage output is
specified. This means that the HTML and manpage build processes must
not share a cache, because the parsed doctrees are cached. Work around
this by using separate cache locations for build targets "sphinx-docs"
(which creates HTML) and "sphinx-manpages". A better solution would
be to only override Sphinx's ManualPageBuilder but that would take a
bit more code (ideally we could override ManualPageWriter but Sphinx
4.3.2 doesn't really support that).
---
Alternative solution: stick with line blocks but use roles like
:command: or :option: (or custom ones). While this would make it
possible to produce HTML that is consistent with code blocks (by adding
a bit of CSS), the source would look uglier and is harder to maintain.
(Let's say we want to add custom formatting to the [|] metacharacters
in HTML. This is much easier with the proposed patch.)
---
[RST line blocks]: https://docutils.sourceforge.io/docs/ref/rst/restructuredtext.html#line-blocks
[backslashes in weird places]: https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/pull/8626#discussion_r782837750
