MkDocs: Fixes missing Parameter tabs in documentation

[saket0187]

Fixes #6305

Problem Description

The Parameters section in MkDocs-generated documentation only displays the "Command line" tab for some modules like v.out.ogr, v.in.ogr etc., while the "Python (grass.script)" and "Python (grass.tools)" tabs are missing. This affects some module documentation pages built with Material for MkDocs.

Root Cause

In lib/gis/parser_md_common.c, the G__md_print_escaped() function was not adding proper indentation after line breaks (\n) in parameter descriptions. Material for MkDocs requires continuation lines within tab blocks to be indented with 4 spaces. Without this indentation, MkDocs exits the tab block prematurely, causing the remaining tabs to not render.

Solution

Modified G__md_print_escaped() to:

• Add 4-space indentation after newlines: fputs("\\\n ", f);
• Replace HTML entities ( ) with regular spaces for tab characters
• Fix code style (default case indentation)

Testing

• Tested with v.out.ogr and v.in.ogr modules
• Verified data-tabs="2:3" in generated HTML shows all 3 tabs
• Compiled and tested on WSL Ubuntu 24.04
• All three tabs now render correctly in the Parameters section

Before Fix

Only Command line tab visible

After Fix

All three tabs (Command line, Python grass.script, Python grass.tools) display correctly

[gulshan-123]

Can you please check if it renders properly in case of <, > ,*, and tab if present in str?
Or is it the case that these can never occur in str?

[saket0187]

Can you please check if it renders properly in case of <, > ,*, and tab if present in str? Or is it the case that these can never occur in str?

Yes, My PR only changed the tab (\t) (\n) handling. The < → <, > → >, and * → \* escapes remain unchanged and work exactly as before, so their rendering is unaffected.

For consistency, I will make a commit to change the manual case '\n': to use do_escape('\n', "\\\n ") like the others, so that it's easier to understand. Let's wait for maintainers review to confirm the approach!

[gulshan-123]

Thanks for clarifying! I did not checked the macro expansion!

I am +1 on using the macro instead of expansion to make it consistent with other part of code (and maybe to avoid confusion for people like me?)

[petrasovaa]

I think the newline is somewhat special case, so maybe moving it into a separate function G__md_print_escaped_newline or something like that may be better. I was thinking of replacing \n with MD_NEWLINE + \n + indent

Not sure about the other change, it is unrelated.

[saket0187]

Closing this PR as it became messy. Created fresh clean PR at #6864 with the requested changes.