On Sun, Sep 14, 2025 at 05:05:39PM +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > Here's what I propose about "language name mapping". There are two > > possibilities: > > > > * Basic: The argument on the @example line (or value of > > HIGHLIGHT_SYNTAX_DEFAULT_LANGUAGE) is used directly in the call to the > > syntax highlighting program. This would require the user changing e.g. > > "@example C++" to "@example c++" or "@example C" - not a big deal at all. > > The main issue I saw with that possibility is that the different > highlighting programs may not have common names for programming > languages. This is not really the case for c++, as cpp can be used for all > of them. So I would suggest removing the mappings for now, changing the > test instead and waiting for reports to re-add mappings if needed.
Even if the different highlighting programs use different names it is unlikely that a project is using more than one of them. If they are, they are free to use a wrapper script. I agree with removing the mappings.
