Adding Ruby extensions inline

[twogee]

I would like to add a custom extension to the Ant task using inline Ruby like this

<asciidoctor ...>
<inlineMacroProcessor>
<![CDATA[
   use_dsl
 
   named :man
   name_positional_attributes 'volnum'

   def process parent, target, attrs
     text = manname = target
     suffix = ''
     target = %(#{manname}.html)
    suffix = if (volnum = attrs['volnum'])
    "(#{volnum})"
  else
    nil
  end
  if parent.document.basebackend? 'html'
    parent.document.register :links, target
    %(#{(create_anchor parent, text, type: :link, target: target).render}#{suffix})
  elsif parent.document.backend == 'manpage'
    %(\\fB#{manname}\\fP#{suffix})
  else
    %(#{manname}#{suffix})
  end
end
]]>
</inlineMacroProcessor>
</asciidoctor>

(the code would be wrapped as a class extending Extensions::InlineMacroProcessor and registered as an extension).

The idea is to avoid compiling an extension Java class and adding it to the classpath.
Would it be possible?

[binout]

Nice idea !
But i don't know if it's possible ;-)

A solution : copy the ruby code in a temporary file and load it with 'require' in order to be registered. Cf https://blog.jdriven.com/2016/11/awesome-asciidoctor-using-ruby-extensions-asciidoctor-gradle-plugin/ for gradle

Another solution for inline extension : use another script language more compatible with jvm such as Groovy ?

[twogee]

How would a Groovy extension work with Ant?

[binout]

Using GroovyCompiler and GroovyClassloader
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/16902906/compiling-and-using-groovy-classes-from-java-at-runtime

Maybe a bit experimental ......

[twogee]

Aren't we looking too far? org.asciidoctor.internal.RubyUtils.loadRubyClass() might be a good starting point...

[twogee]

So, WDYT about adding RubyExtensionRegistry.loadClassScript() and corresponding RubyUtils.loadRubyClassScript() or something like that?

[binout]

i think, just map the inlineMacroProcessor with RubyExtensionRegistry. inlineMacro(blockName, <ruby code>)

about xml definifition, i propose

<inlineMacroProcessor blockName="twitter" source="ruby">
<![CDATA[ .... ]]>
</inlineMacroProcessor>

and to keep backward compatibility, source has default value java

<inlineMacroProcessor blockName="twitter" source="java" classname="...."/>

[binout]

@mojavelinux If you have a few minutes, can you give your opinion? 😉

[twogee]

Thanks for the pointer, XML definition is fine. Should I consider this a go-ahead?

[mojavelinux]

Seems reasonable to me.

Another option is to leverage the Groovy-based extension DSL, which is what is used in the Gradle plugin. See https://github.com/asciidoctor/asciidoctorj-groovy-dsl. That's where the language setting would probably come in.

[mojavelinux]

Though I would propose dropping the "Processor" part as that is meant to be an internal construct. So it would be:

<inlineMacro>
</inlineMacro>

Another option would just be extensions and allow anything that goes inside the Asciidoctor::Extensions.register block.

[twogee]

Hmm, extensions is an attribute, so it could be confusing. Dropping "Processor" would eventually lead to <post/>, <pre/>, etc should the idea be applied to other extensions...

[mojavelinux]

Sorry, I meant drop "Processor" when it's a syntax extension. In other words, use the same names that are used in the DSL.

• inlineMacro
• blockMacro
• block
• treeProcessor
• preprocessor
• postprocessor
• docinfoProcessor

[mojavelinux]

To be consistent with the Ant ecosystem, I think you should use all lowercase.

• inlinemacro
• blockmacro
• etc.

[twogee]

Thanks, I get it now. I believe Ant is case insensitive; camelcase is used for clarity and reflects the naming of underlying Java methods.

[mojavelinux]

Sure, I get your point. But when you document it, I think it's important to fit with the ecosystem for which your developing. The Ant manual uses lowercase for all tags, so using lowercase would make it look consistent. But that's just a suggestion. It's up to you to decide what to do.