Skip to content

reStructuredText

reStructuredText (RST) is a plain-text markup syntax for writing technical documentation. It is designed to be simple, easy to read and write, and highly extensible. RST is often used for writing documentation for software projects, and is the default markup language for the Python programming language.

RST uses a set of simple syntax elements, such as headings, bullet points, and tables, to format documents. It also includes support for cross-referencing, inline formatting, and definition lists.

One of the key features of RST is its ability to be automatically converted to other formats, such as HTML, PDF, and man pages. This makes it a popular choice for writing documentation that needs to be published in multiple formats.

To use RST, you will need a tool or library that can parse and convert RST documents to other formats. Some popular options include Sphinx, which is a popular documentation generation tool for Python, and Pandoc, which is a universal document converter that supports a wide range of markup languages.

You can find more information about reStructuredText in the official documentation: https://docutils.sourceforge.io/docs/ref/rst/restructuredtext.html

Pros and cons of reStructuredText

Here are some pros and cons of using reStructuredText (RST):

Pros:

  • Simple and easy to read and write: RST has a simple syntax that is easy to read and write, even for people with no previous experience with markup languages. This makes it a good choice for writers who want to focus on the content of their documents, rather than the formatting.

  • Highly extensible: RST is highly extensible, with support for custom directives and roles that allow users to define their own syntax elements and formatting options. This makes it a good choice for projects that need a high degree of customization.

  • Automatic conversion to other formats: RST documents can be automatically converted to other formats, such as HTML, PDF, and man pages, using tools like Sphinx and Pandoc. This makes it a good choice for projects that need to publish documentation in multiple formats.

Cons:

  • Limited formatting options: RST has a limited set of formatting options compared to some other markup languages, such as Markdown. This can make it more difficult to achieve certain formatting effects, such as complex tables or layout elements.

  • Conversion tools can be complex: While the automatic conversion of RST documents to other formats is a powerful feature, the tools that support it (such as Sphinx and Pandoc) can be complex to set up and use. This may be a barrier to entry for some users.

  • Less widespread adoption: RST is not as widely used as some other markup languages, such as Markdown, which means that there may be fewer resources and tools available for working with it. This can make it more difficult to find help or guidance when working with RST.

Overall, RST is a powerful and extensible markup language that is well-suited to technical documentation. Its simplicity and ease of use make it a good choice for many projects, but its limited formatting options and less widespread adoption may be a drawback for some users.