[WIP]Only execute codefolding preprocessor when requested

[juhasch]

• Only execute preprocessor when configuration variable is set
• add test
• add documentation

Addresses #792

[juhasch]

@jcb91 : I would like to move the autoclass API docs to a separate chapter internals, and instead only have the description on how to use the different exporters, pre- and preprocessors under exporting ?

[jcb91]

I would like to move the autoclass API docs to a separate chapter internals, and instead only have the description on how to use the different exporters, pre- and preprocessors under exporting?

Sure, seems like a sensible move. I think we even already have an internals file :)

[juhasch]

Is there any deeper meaning why exporting.rst is rst and internals.md is md format ?
Otherwise I will convert the internals stuff to rst.

[jcb91]

Is there any deeper meaning why exporting.rst is rst and internals.md is
md format ?
Otherwise I will convert the internals stuff to rst.

No, I just kept to markdown for anything that didn't require rst-only
features, to make it easier to compare with the main (markdown) readme.
Convert away :)

[jcb91]

in rst, inline literals may need two backticks? I believe the notebook repo has somehow enabled use of single backticks, but I'm not sure how. The only reference to single backticks that I can find is this, which seems to suggest that by default, single backticks have no special meaning

[jcb91]

it seems the single backticks give the default role, which is configurable. Perhaps we should add a

default_role = 'code'

to conf.py?

[juhasch]

Good catch. Yes, I think we should set the default role.

[juhasch]

@jcb91 Any idea why one test fails ? I don't see how my changes would affect it.

[jcb91]

It's the 4.x notebook branch, and it's just failing to build notebook, before even running our tests, so it's not really anything to do with your changes, I think. Looks fine to merge to me!

…

On 27 Nov 2016 09:01, "Juergen Hasch" ***@***.***> wrote: @jcb91 <https://github.com/jcb91> Any idea why one test fails ? I don't see how my changes would affect it. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#794 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFXq9kLSs6nEfobqTXbEy6g5Yv7vXdgvks5rCUbygaJpZM4KyYRA> .