Re: Windows support

[James Mansion]

On Mon, 09 May 2011 15:26:54 +0100, KHMan <address@hidden> wrote:
> > I was excited by Lout but rather gave up when it seemed that I
> > couldn't do the same things as on *nix and found the code style so
> > impenetrable I couldn't fix it.
>
> Lout should build out-of-the-box with Cygwin. (But I haven't built it  
> recently.) [A]

Sure - I do try to avoid Cygwin tho.  And while I have vbox, I prefer to  
be able to run native in Windows most of the time (I get better battery  
life that way for a start).

What was most upsetting to me really was how hard it was to see where and  
how the command line to execute was being built.  I don't normally  
struggle like that.  I can't really find a polite way to describe the  
structure of it - its like the output from a funky source to source  
translator.

No matter.  I'm trying Sphinx now, and at a push I could try to see how to  
generate Lout of the latex and docbook backends don't work out.  Shame - I  
quite liked lout syntax.