ebuku VS pandoc

Another option is to use something like ebuku.

i remember looking at that Google style guide a while back, and not being enthused about it. It's true my style across my POSIX scripts isn't yet entirely consistent, as i'm new to writing POSIX shell scripts, and am still working out what's best for me, as the person who's going to be the primary maintainer. Still, i believe my style to be basically consistent within a given script. Having been programming for a few decades now - although i only started coding-for-pay in the late 90s, starting with Perl - i've developed my own preferences regarding code layout (such as in my ELisp packages, e.g. Ebuku), and nowadays take the approach: I'll follow others' style in others' projects, and will generally try to follow common style standards in my own projects, but will modify them as needed when i find they're not conducive to my work.

Well, indeed, i certainly wasn't expecting you to do so! But i already have more than enough volunteer FOSS stuff on my plate as it is (e.g. Ebuku, pulseaudio-control, s6-man-pages, execline-man-pages and guides, amongst various other things), and not using mold with gcc 11 is no problem for me at this point. So i've just noted the issue with the patch on the wiki page, and the patch will have to be updated by someone for whom it's more important.

Fair point. Still, as a FOSS dev myself, i feel that the title might serve as a useful reminder to a number of their readers. Particularly when so many people use FOSS developed by large corporations, and see themselves as 'customers' entitled to 'responsive service'[a] that those of us who aren't a corporation aren't necessarily in a position to provide (even if we do try to provide 'best effort'). The contents of the screencap for one of my FOSS projects is not random. :-)

Based on your post headline, i was going to suggest my Ebuku package, an Emacs frontend to the buku Web bookmark manager - i use it myself, and it has support for both tags and comments on links. But it doesn't meet your requirement of capturing from the browser; i copy-and-paste the URL from the browser into an Emacs prompt.

Me asking for actual data about the the extent to which various arguments to the -O flag is me "trying to argue with you" and "having a bad day"? Er, what? i'm saying your assertions might well be correct, but as a dev myself (here's some of the stuff i've been doing during our exchange), i want some concrete data in support of this, because "premature optimisation is the root of all evil" (cf. "Rob Pike's 5 Rules of Programming").

Not beyond playing around a bit with Squeak. i like Smalltalk's message-passing approach to OO, and i like how thoroughly modifiable the environment is. i haven't spent enough time to know how easily it can interface with the system on which the image is running; one of the things i like about Emacs is that, in addition to being so modifiable itself, it provides lots of support for interacting with software outside of itself. (E.g. i wrote an Emacs package which provides an Emacs UI for the CLI-based buku Web bookmark manager: Ebuku.)

My main authoring tool is then Emacs Markdown Mode (https://jblevins.org/projects/markdown-mode/). For data entry, it comes with some bells and whistles similar to org-mode, like C-c C-l for inserting links etc.

I seldom export my notes for external usage, but if it is the case, I use lowdown (https://kristaps.bsd.lv/lowdown/) which also comes with some nice output targets (among the more unusual are Groff and Terminal). Of cource pandoc (https://pandoc.org/) does a very good job here, too.

This is one of those things that the ever-amazing pandoc (https://pandoc.org/) does very well, on top of supporting virtually every other document format.

Folks feel the same way about Markdown versus LaTeX: why use something significantly more complicated where a looser, human-readable grammar works better?

For any other situations, I use https://pandoc.org/, or, generate a Word doc scriptomatically.

pandoc toolchain pour builder une version confortable/imprimable en phase de travail (ePub, pdf, docx, html)

Congrats on the launch, I guess, but there are so many free options that I can't think of a situation where paying $0.25 per document would be justified...? Just to name a few:

Back in the days, I used to use XSL-FO [0] and it was okay. It was not very precise but it rarely if ever broke, and was perfectly integrated with an XML/XSLT solution. Yeah, this was a long time ago.

Last month I used html-to-pdfmake [1] and it's also not very precise and more fragile, but very efficient and fast.

Yet another approach would be to pro grammatically generate .rtf files (for example) and use Pandoc [2] to produce PDFs (I have not tried this in production but don't see why it wouldn't work).

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XSL_Formatting_Objects

[1] https://www.npmjs.com/package/html-to-pdfmake

[2] https://pandoc.org/

Others have mentioned static site generators. I like Hakyll [1] because it can tightly integrate with Pandoc [2] and allows you to develop custom solutions if your needs ever grow.

[1]: https://jaspervdj.be/hakyll/

[2]: https://pandoc.org/

Have you compared it with a conversion by pandoc (https://pandoc.org/)?

I have used it to kickstart a blogging project that I wish to come back to soon. The Lua inter-op for custom readers, writers and filters is great but I wish there was more editor integration and even perhaps an official IDE/editor with built-in debugging features (probably something already do-able with Emacs but I haven't checked). The only blocker for my project is no support for "ChunkedDoc" for Lua filters [1] which forces me to write more code and a complicated Makefile.

[1]: https://github.com/jgm/pandoc/issues/9061