Update documentation to syntax highlight coderefs/pull/1803/head

5 files changed, 342 insertions, 316 deletions

diff --git a/googlemock/docs/CheatSheet.md b/googlemock/docs/CheatSheet.md
index d54dd16..adfc691 100644
--- a/googlemock/docs/CheatSheet.md
+++ b/googlemock/docs/CheatSheet.md
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
 ## Mocking a Normal Class ##
 
 Given
-```
+```cpp
 class Foo {
   ...
   virtual ~Foo();
@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ class Foo {
 };
 ```
 (note that `~Foo()` **must** be virtual) we can define its mock as
-```
+```cpp
 #include "gmock/gmock.h"
 
 class MockFoo : public Foo {
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ class MockFoo : public Foo {
 
 To create a "nice" mock object which ignores all uninteresting calls,
 or a "strict" mock object, which treats them as failures:
-```
+```cpp
 NiceMock<MockFoo> nice_foo;     // The type is a subclass of MockFoo.
 StrictMock<MockFoo> strict_foo; // The type is a subclass of MockFoo.
 ```
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ StrictMock<MockFoo> strict_foo; // The type is a subclass of MockFoo.
 ## Mocking a Class Template ##
 
 To mock
-```
+```cpp
 template <typename Elem>
 class StackInterface {
  public:
@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ class StackInterface {
 };
 ```
 (note that `~StackInterface()` **must** be virtual) just append `_T` to the `MOCK_*` macros:
-```
+```cpp
 template <typename Elem>
 class MockStack : public StackInterface<Elem> {
  public:
@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ If your mock function doesn't use the default calling convention, you
 can specify it by appending `_WITH_CALLTYPE` to any of the macros
 described in the previous two sections and supplying the calling
 convention as the first argument to the macro. For example,
-```
+```cpp
   MOCK_METHOD1_WITH_CALLTYPE(STDMETHODCALLTYPE, Foo, bool(int n));
   MOCK_CONST_METHOD2_WITH_CALLTYPE(STDMETHODCALLTYPE, Bar, int(double x, double y));
 ```
@@ -81,8 +81,8 @@ The typical flow is:
   1. When a mock objects is destructed, Google Mock automatically verifies that all expectations on it have been satisfied.
 
 Here is an example:
-```
-using ::testing::Return;                            // #1
+```cpp
+using ::testing::Return;                          // #1
 
 TEST(BarTest, DoesThis) {
   MockFoo foo;                                    // #2
@@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ Google Mock has a **built-in default action** for any function that
 returns `void`, `bool`, a numeric value, or a pointer.
 
 To customize the default action for functions with return type `T` globally:
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::DefaultValue;
 
 // Sets the default value to be returned. T must be CopyConstructible.
@@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ DefaultValue<T>::Clear();
 ```
 
 To customize the default action for a particular method, use `ON_CALL()`:
-```
+```cpp
 ON_CALL(mock_object, method(matchers))
     .With(multi_argument_matcher)  ?
     .WillByDefault(action);
@@ -130,7 +130,7 @@ ON_CALL(mock_object, method(matchers))
 
 `EXPECT_CALL()` sets **expectations** on a mock method (How will it be
 called? What will it do?):
-```
+```cpp
 EXPECT_CALL(mock_object, method(matchers))
     .With(multi_argument_matcher)  ?
     .Times(cardinality)            ?
@@ -155,22 +155,25 @@ A **matcher** matches a _single_ argument.  You can use it inside
 `ON_CALL()` or `EXPECT_CALL()`, or use it to validate a value
 directly:
 
+| Matcher | Description |
+|:--------|:------------|
 | `EXPECT_THAT(value, matcher)` | Asserts that `value` matches `matcher`. |
-|:------------------------------|:----------------------------------------|
 | `ASSERT_THAT(value, matcher)` | The same as `EXPECT_THAT(value, matcher)`, except that it generates a **fatal** failure. |
 
 Built-in matchers (where `argument` is the function argument) are
 divided into several categories:
 
 ## Wildcard ##
+| Matcher | Description |
+|:--------|:------------|
 |`_`|`argument` can be any value of the correct type.|
-|:--|:-----------------------------------------------|
 |`A<type>()` or `An<type>()`|`argument` can be any value of type `type`.     |
 
 ## Generic Comparison ##
 
-|`Eq(value)` or `value`|`argument == value`|
+| Matcher              | Description       |
 |:---------------------|:------------------|
+|`Eq(value)` or `value`|`argument == value`|
 |`Ge(value)`           |`argument >= value`|
 |`Gt(value)`           |`argument > value` |
 |`Le(value)`           |`argument <= value`|
@@ -178,8 +181,7 @@ divided into several categories:
 |`Ne(value)`           |`argument != value`|
 |`IsNull()`            |`argument` is a `NULL` pointer (raw or smart).|
 |`NotNull()`           |`argument` is a non-null pointer (raw or smart).|
-|`VariantWith<T>(m)`   |`argument` is `variant<>` that holds the alternative of
-type T with a value matching `m`.|
+|`VariantWith<T>(m)`   |`argument` is `variant<>` that holds the alternative of type T with a value matching `m`.|
 |`Ref(variable)`       |`argument` is a reference to `variable`.|
 |`TypedEq<type>(value)`|`argument` has type `type` and is equal to `value`. You may need to use this instead of `Eq(value)` when the mock function is overloaded.|
 
@@ -192,11 +194,12 @@ matcher will be changed.
 
 ## Floating-Point Matchers ##
 
-|`DoubleEq(a_double)`|`argument` is a `double` value approximately equal to `a_double`, treating two NaNs as unequal.|
-|:-------------------|:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
-|`FloatEq(a_float)`  |`argument` is a `float` value approximately equal to `a_float`, treating two NaNs as unequal.  |
-|`NanSensitiveDoubleEq(a_double)`|`argument` is a `double` value approximately equal to `a_double`, treating two NaNs as equal.  |
-|`NanSensitiveFloatEq(a_float)`|`argument` is a `float` value approximately equal to `a_float`, treating two NaNs as equal.    |
+| Matcher            | Description                                                                                              |
+|:-------------------|:---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
+|`DoubleEq(a_double)`|`argument` is a `double` value approximately equal to `a_double`, treating two NaNs as unequal.           |
+|`FloatEq(a_float)`  |`argument` is a `float` value approximately equal to `a_float`, treating two NaNs as unequal.             |
+|`NanSensitiveDoubleEq(a_double)`|`argument` is a `double` value approximately equal to `a_double`, treating two NaNs as equal. |
+|`NanSensitiveFloatEq(a_float)`|`argument` is a `float` value approximately equal to `a_float`, treating two NaNs as equal.     |
 
 The above matchers use ULP-based comparison (the same as used in
 [Google Test](../../googletest/)). They
@@ -206,26 +209,28 @@ the IEEE standard, which requires comparing two NaNs for equality to
 return false. The `NanSensitive*` version instead treats two NaNs as
 equal, which is often what a user wants.
 
+| Matcher | Description |
+|:--------|:------------|
 |`DoubleNear(a_double, max_abs_error)`|`argument` is a `double` value close to `a_double` (absolute error <= `max_abs_error`), treating two NaNs as unequal.|
-|:------------------------------------|:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
-|`FloatNear(a_float, max_abs_error)`  |`argument` is a `float` value close to `a_float` (absolute error <= `max_abs_error`), treating two NaNs as unequal.  |
-|`NanSensitiveDoubleNear(a_double, max_abs_error)`|`argument` is a `double` value close to `a_double` (absolute error <= `max_abs_error`), treating two NaNs as equal.  |
-|`NanSensitiveFloatNear(a_float, max_abs_error)`|`argument` is a `float` value close to `a_float` (absolute error <= `max_abs_error`), treating two NaNs as equal.    |
+|`FloatNear(a_float, max_abs_error)`|`argument` is a `float` value close to `a_float` (absolute error <= `max_abs_error`), treating two NaNs as unequal.|
+|`NanSensitiveDoubleNear(a_double, max_abs_error)`|`argument` is a `double` value close to `a_double` (absolute error <= `max_abs_error`), treating two NaNs as equal.|
+|`NanSensitiveFloatNear(a_float, max_abs_error)`|`argument` is a `float` value close to `a_float` (absolute error <= `max_abs_error`), treating two NaNs as equal.|
 
 ## String Matchers ##
 
 The `argument` can be either a C string or a C++ string object:
 
-|`ContainsRegex(string)`|`argument` matches the given regular expression.|
-|:----------------------|:-----------------------------------------------|
-|`EndsWith(suffix)`     |`argument` ends with string `suffix`.           |
-|`HasSubstr(string)`    |`argument` contains `string` as a sub-string.   |
+| Matcher               | Description                                       |
+|:----------------------|:--------------------------------------------------|
+|`ContainsRegex(string)`|`argument` matches the given regular expression.   |
+|`EndsWith(suffix)`     |`argument` ends with string `suffix`.              |
+|`HasSubstr(string)`    |`argument` contains `string` as a sub-string.      |
 |`MatchesRegex(string)` |`argument` matches the given regular expression with the match starting at the first character and ending at the last character.|
-|`StartsWith(prefix)`   |`argument` starts with string `prefix`.         |
-|`StrCaseEq(string)`    |`argument` is equal to `string`, ignoring case. |
+|`StartsWith(prefix)`   |`argument` starts with string `prefix`.            |
+|`StrCaseEq(string)`    |`argument` is equal to `string`, ignoring case.    |
 |`StrCaseNe(string)`    |`argument` is not equal to `string`, ignoring case.|
-|`StrEq(string)`        |`argument` is equal to `string`.                |
-|`StrNe(string)`        |`argument` is not equal to `string`.            |
+|`StrEq(string)`        |`argument` is equal to `string`.                   |
+|`StrNe(string)`        |`argument` is not equal to `string`.               |
 
 `ContainsRegex()` and `MatchesRegex()` use the regular expression
 syntax defined
@@ -240,18 +245,19 @@ Most STL-style containers support `==`, so you can use
 container exactly.   If you want to write the elements in-line,
 match them more flexibly, or get more informative messages, you can use:
 
+| Matcher | Description |
+|:--------|:------------|
 | `ContainerEq(container)` | The same as `Eq(container)` except that the failure message also includes which elements are in one container but not the other. |
-|:-------------------------|:---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
-| `Contains(e)`            | `argument` contains an element that matches `e`, which can be either a value or a matcher.                                       |
-| `Each(e)`                | `argument` is a container where _every_ element matches `e`, which can be either a value or a matcher.                           |
+| `Contains(e)` | `argument` contains an element that matches `e`, which can be either a value or a matcher. |
+| `Each(e)` | `argument` is a container where _every_ element matches `e`, which can be either a value or a matcher. |
 | `ElementsAre(e0, e1, ..., en)` | `argument` has `n + 1` elements, where the i-th element matches `ei`, which can be a value or a matcher. 0 to 10 arguments are allowed. |
 | `ElementsAreArray({ e0, e1, ..., en })`, `ElementsAreArray(array)`, or `ElementsAreArray(array, count)` | The same as `ElementsAre()` except that the expected element values/matchers come from an initializer list, STL-style container, or C-style array. |
-| `IsEmpty()`              | `argument` is an empty container (`container.empty()`).                                                                          |
+| `IsEmpty()` | `argument` is an empty container (`container.empty()`). |
 | `Pointwise(m, container)` | `argument` contains the same number of elements as in `container`, and for all i, (the i-th element in `argument`, the i-th element in `container`) match `m`, which is a matcher on 2-tuples. E.g. `Pointwise(Le(), upper_bounds)` verifies that each element in `argument` doesn't exceed the corresponding element in `upper_bounds`. See more detail below. |
-| `SizeIs(m)`              | `argument` is a container whose size matches `m`. E.g. `SizeIs(2)` or `SizeIs(Lt(2))`.                                           |
+| `SizeIs(m)` | `argument` is a container whose size matches `m`. E.g. `SizeIs(2)` or `SizeIs(Lt(2))`. |
 | `UnorderedElementsAre(e0, e1, ..., en)` | `argument` has `n + 1` elements, and under some permutation each element matches an `ei` (for a different `i`), which can be a value or a matcher. 0 to 10 arguments are allowed. |
 | `UnorderedElementsAreArray({ e0, e1, ..., en })`, `UnorderedElementsAreArray(array)`, or `UnorderedElementsAreArray(array, count)` | The same as `UnorderedElementsAre()` except that the expected element values/matchers come from an initializer list, STL-style container, or C-style array. |
-| `WhenSorted(m)`          | When `argument` is sorted using the `<` operator, it matches container matcher `m`. E.g. `WhenSorted(ElementsAre(1, 2, 3))` verifies that `argument` contains elements `1`, `2`, and `3`, ignoring order. |
+| `WhenSorted(m)` | When `argument` is sorted using the `<` operator, it matches container matcher `m`. E.g. `WhenSorted(ElementsAre(1, 2, 3))` verifies that `argument` contains elements `1`, `2`, and `3`, ignoring order. |
 | `WhenSortedBy(comparator, m)` | The same as `WhenSorted(m)`, except that the given comparator instead of `<` is used to sort `argument`. E.g. `WhenSortedBy(std::greater<int>(), ElementsAre(3, 2, 1))`. |
 
 Notes:
@@ -262,7 +268,7 @@ Notes:
   * The array being matched may be multi-dimensional (i.e. its elements can be arrays).
   * `m` in `Pointwise(m, ...)` should be a matcher for `::testing::tuple<T, U>` where `T` and `U` are the element type of the actual container and the expected container, respectively. For example, to compare two `Foo` containers where `Foo` doesn't support `operator==` but has an `Equals()` method, one might write:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::get;
 MATCHER(FooEq, "") {
   return get<0>(arg).Equals(get<1>(arg));
@@ -273,21 +279,24 @@ EXPECT_THAT(actual_foos, Pointwise(FooEq(), expected_foos));
 
 ## Member Matchers ##
 
+| Matcher | Description |
+|:--------|:------------|
 |`Field(&class::field, m)`|`argument.field` (or `argument->field` when `argument` is a plain pointer) matches matcher `m`, where `argument` is an object of type _class_.|
-|:------------------------|:---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
-|`Key(e)`                 |`argument.first` matches `e`, which can be either a value or a matcher. E.g. `Contains(Key(Le(5)))` can verify that a `map` contains a key `<= 5`.|
-|`Pair(m1, m2)`           |`argument` is an `std::pair` whose `first` field matches `m1` and `second` field matches `m2`.                                                |
+|`Key(e)`|`argument.first` matches `e`, which can be either a value or a matcher. E.g. `Contains(Key(Le(5)))` can verify that a `map` contains a key `<= 5`.|
+|`Pair(m1, m2)`|`argument` is an `std::pair` whose `first` field matches `m1` and `second` field matches `m2`.|
 |`Property(&class::property, m)`|`argument.property()` (or `argument->property()` when `argument` is a plain pointer) matches matcher `m`, where `argument` is an object of type _class_.|
 
 ## Matching the Result of a Function or Functor ##
 
-|`ResultOf(f, m)`|`f(argument)` matches matcher `m`, where `f` is a function or functor.|
+| Matcher        | Description                                                          |
 |:---------------|:---------------------------------------------------------------------|
+|`ResultOf(f, m)`|`f(argument)` matches matcher `m`, where `f` is a function or functor.|
 
 ## Pointer Matchers ##
 
-|`Pointee(m)`|`argument` (either a smart pointer or a raw pointer) points to a value that matches matcher `m`.|
-|:-----------|:-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
+| Matcher                 | Description                                                                                    |
+|:------------------------|:-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
+|`Pointee(m)`             |`argument` (either a smart pointer or a raw pointer) points to a value that matches matcher `m`.|
 |`WhenDynamicCastTo<T>(m)`| when `argument` is passed through `dynamic_cast<T>()`, it matches matcher `m`.                 |
 
 ## Multiargument Matchers ##
@@ -296,8 +305,9 @@ Technically, all matchers match a _single_ value. A "multi-argument"
 matcher is just one that matches a _tuple_. The following matchers can
 be used to match a tuple `(x, y)`:
 
+| Matcher | Description |
+|:--------|:------------|
 |`Eq()`|`x == y`|
-|:-----|:-------|
 |`Ge()`|`x >= y`|
 |`Gt()`|`x > y` |
 |`Le()`|`x <= y`|
@@ -307,37 +317,42 @@ be used to match a tuple `(x, y)`:
 You can use the following selectors to pick a subset of the arguments
 (or reorder them) to participate in the matching:
 
+| Matcher | Description |
+|:--------|:------------|
 |`AllArgs(m)`|Equivalent to `m`. Useful as syntactic sugar in `.With(AllArgs(m))`.|
-|:-----------|:-------------------------------------------------------------------|
 |`Args<N1, N2, ..., Nk>(m)`|The tuple of the `k` selected (using 0-based indices) arguments matches `m`, e.g. `Args<1, 2>(Eq())`.|
 
 ## Composite Matchers ##
 
 You can make a matcher from one or more other matchers:
 
-|`AllOf(m1, m2, ..., mn)`|`argument` matches all of the matchers `m1` to `mn`.|
-|:-----------------------|:---------------------------------------------------|
+| Matcher                | Description                                                 |
+|:-----------------------|:------------------------------------------------------------|
+|`AllOf(m1, m2, ..., mn)`|`argument` matches all of the matchers `m1` to `mn`.         |
 |`AnyOf(m1, m2, ..., mn)`|`argument` matches at least one of the matchers `m1` to `mn`.|
-|`Not(m)`                |`argument` doesn't match matcher `m`.               |
+|`Not(m)`                |`argument` doesn't match matcher `m`.                        |
 
 ## Adapters for Matchers ##
 
+| Matcher | Description |
+|:--------|:------------|
 |`MatcherCast<T>(m)`|casts matcher `m` to type `Matcher<T>`.|
-|:------------------|:--------------------------------------|
-|`SafeMatcherCast<T>(m)`| [safely casts](CookBook.md#casting-matchers) matcher `m` to type `Matcher<T>`. |
-|`Truly(predicate)` |`predicate(argument)` returns something considered by C++ to be true, where `predicate` is a function or functor.|
+|`SafeMatcherCast<T>(m)`| [safely casts](CookBook.md#casting-matchers) matcher `m` to type `Matcher<T>`.|
+|`Truly(predicate)`|`predicate(argument)` returns something considered by C++ to be true, where `predicate` is a function or functor.|
 
 ## Matchers as Predicates ##
 
+| Matcher | Description |
+|:--------|:------------|
 |`Matches(m)(value)`|evaluates to `true` if `value` matches `m`. You can use `Matches(m)` alone as a unary functor.|
-|:------------------|:---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
-|`ExplainMatchResult(m, value, result_listener)`|evaluates to `true` if `value` matches `m`, explaining the result to `result_listener`.       |
-|`Value(value, m)`  |evaluates to `true` if `value` matches `m`.                                                   |
+|`ExplainMatchResult(m, value, result_listener)`|evaluates to `true` if `value` matches `m`, explaining the result to `result_listener`.|
+|`Value(value, m)`|evaluates to `true` if `value` matches `m`.|
 
 ## Defining Matchers ##
 
+| Matcher | Description |
+|:--------|:------------|
 | `MATCHER(IsEven, "") { return (arg % 2) == 0; }` | Defines a matcher `IsEven()` to match an even number. |
-|:-------------------------------------------------|:------------------------------------------------------|
 | `MATCHER_P(IsDivisibleBy, n, "") { *result_listener << "where the remainder is " << (arg % n); return (arg % n) == 0; }` | Defines a macher `IsDivisibleBy(n)` to match a number divisible by `n`. |
 | `MATCHER_P2(IsBetween, a, b, std::string(negation ? "isn't" : "is") + " between " + PrintToString(a) + " and " + PrintToString(b)) { return a <= arg && arg <= b; }` | Defines a matcher `IsBetween(a, b)` to match a value in the range [`a`, `b`]. |
 
@@ -349,9 +364,10 @@ You can make a matcher from one or more other matchers:
 
 ## Matchers as Test Assertions ##
 
+| Matcher | Description |
+|:--------|:------------|
 |`ASSERT_THAT(expression, m)`|Generates a [fatal failure](../../googletest/docs/primer.md#assertions) if the value of `expression` doesn't match matcher `m`.|
-|:---------------------------|:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
-|`EXPECT_THAT(expression, m)`|Generates a non-fatal failure if the value of `expression` doesn't match matcher `m`.                                                          |
+|`EXPECT_THAT(expression, m)`|Generates a non-fatal failure if the value of `expression` doesn't match matcher `m`.|
 
 # Actions #
 
@@ -359,77 +375,83 @@ You can make a matcher from one or more other matchers:
 
 ## Returning a Value ##
 
+| Matcher | Description |
+|:--------|:------------|
 |`Return()`|Return from a `void` mock function.|
-|:---------|:----------------------------------|
 |`Return(value)`|Return `value`. If the type of `value` is different to the mock function's return type, `value` is converted to the latter type <i>at the time the expectation is set</i>, not when the action is executed.|
 |`ReturnArg<N>()`|Return the `N`-th (0-based) argument.|
 |`ReturnNew<T>(a1, ..., ak)`|Return `new T(a1, ..., ak)`; a different object is created each time.|
-|`ReturnNull()`|Return a null pointer.             |
+|`ReturnNull()`|Return a null pointer.|
 |`ReturnPointee(ptr)`|Return the value pointed to by `ptr`.|
-|`ReturnRef(variable)`|Return a reference to `variable`.  |
+|`ReturnRef(variable)`|Return a reference to `variable`.|
 |`ReturnRefOfCopy(value)`|Return a reference to a copy of `value`; the copy lives as long as the action.|
 
 ## Side Effects ##
 
+| Matcher | Description |
+|:--------|:------------|
 |`Assign(&variable, value)`|Assign `value` to variable.|
-|:-------------------------|:--------------------------|
-| `DeleteArg<N>()`         | Delete the `N`-th (0-based) argument, which must be a pointer. |
-| `SaveArg<N>(pointer)`    | Save the `N`-th (0-based) argument to `*pointer`. |
-| `SaveArgPointee<N>(pointer)` | Save the value pointed to by the `N`-th (0-based) argument to `*pointer`. |
-| `SetArgReferee<N>(value)` |	Assign value to the variable referenced by the `N`-th (0-based) argument. |
+|`DeleteArg<N>()`| Delete the `N`-th (0-based) argument, which must be a pointer.|
+|`SaveArg<N>(pointer)`| Save the `N`-th (0-based) argument to `*pointer`.|
+|`SaveArgPointee<N>(pointer)`| Save the value pointed to by the `N`-th (0-based) argument to `*pointer`.|
+|`SetArgReferee<N>(value)` |	Assign value to the variable referenced by the `N`-th (0-based) argument. |
 |`SetArgPointee<N>(value)` |Assign `value` to the variable pointed by the `N`-th (0-based) argument.|
 |`SetArgumentPointee<N>(value)`|Same as `SetArgPointee<N>(value)`. Deprecated. Will be removed in v1.7.0.|
 |`SetArrayArgument<N>(first, last)`|Copies the elements in source range [`first`, `last`) to the array pointed to by the `N`-th (0-based) argument, which can be either a pointer or an iterator. The action does not take ownership of the elements in the source range.|
 |`SetErrnoAndReturn(error, value)`|Set `errno` to `error` and return `value`.|
-|`Throw(exception)`        |Throws the given exception, which can be any copyable value. Available since v1.1.0.|
+|`Throw(exception)`|Throws the given exception, which can be any copyable value. Available since v1.1.0.|
 
 ## Using a Function or a Functor as an Action ##
 
+| Matcher | Description |
+|:--------|:------------|
 |`Invoke(f)`|Invoke `f` with the arguments passed to the mock function, where `f` can be a global/static function or a functor.|
-|:----------|:-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
-|`Invoke(object_pointer, &class::method)`|Invoke the {method on the object with the arguments passed to the mock function.                                  |
-|`InvokeWithoutArgs(f)`|Invoke `f`, which can be a global/static function or a functor. `f` must take no arguments.                       |
-|`InvokeWithoutArgs(object_pointer, &class::method)`|Invoke the method on the object, which takes no arguments.                                                        |
+|`Invoke(object_pointer, &class::method)`|Invoke the {method on the object with the arguments passed to the mock function.|
+|`InvokeWithoutArgs(f)`|Invoke `f`, which can be a global/static function or a functor. `f` must take no arguments.|
+|`InvokeWithoutArgs(object_pointer, &class::method)`|Invoke the method on the object, which takes no arguments.|
 |`InvokeArgument<N>(arg1, arg2, ..., argk)`|Invoke the mock function's `N`-th (0-based) argument, which must be a function or a functor, with the `k` arguments.|
 
 The return value of the invoked function is used as the return value
 of the action.
 
 When defining a function or functor to be used with `Invoke*()`, you can declare any unused parameters as `Unused`:
-```
+```cpp
   double Distance(Unused, double x, double y) { return sqrt(x*x + y*y); }
   ...
   EXPECT_CALL(mock, Foo("Hi", _, _)).WillOnce(Invoke(Distance));
 ```
 
 In `InvokeArgument<N>(...)`, if an argument needs to be passed by reference, wrap it inside `ByRef()`. For example,
-```
+```cpp
   InvokeArgument<2>(5, string("Hi"), ByRef(foo))
 ```
 calls the mock function's #2 argument, passing to it `5` and `string("Hi")` by value, and `foo` by reference.
 
 ## Default Action ##
 
+| Matcher | Description |
+|:--------|:------------|
 |`DoDefault()`|Do the default action (specified by `ON_CALL()` or the built-in one).|
-|:------------|:--------------------------------------------------------------------|
 
 **Note:** due to technical reasons, `DoDefault()` cannot be used inside  a composite action - trying to do so will result in a run-time error.
 
 ## Composite Actions ##
 
-|`DoAll(a1, a2, ..., an)`|Do all actions `a1` to `an` and return the result of `an` in each invocation. The first `n - 1` sub-actions must return void. |
-|:-----------------------|:-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
-|`IgnoreResult(a)`       |Perform action `a` and ignore its result. `a` must not return void.                                                           |
-|`WithArg<N>(a)`         |Pass the `N`-th (0-based) argument of the mock function to action `a` and perform it.                                         |
+| Matcher                      | Description                                                                                                                  |
+|:-----------------------------|:-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
+|`DoAll(a1, a2, ..., an)`      |Do all actions `a1` to `an` and return the result of `an` in each invocation. The first `n - 1` sub-actions must return void. |
+|`IgnoreResult(a)`             |Perform action `a` and ignore its result. `a` must not return void.                                                           |
+|`WithArg<N>(a)`               |Pass the `N`-th (0-based) argument of the mock function to action `a` and perform it.                                         |
 |`WithArgs<N1, N2, ..., Nk>(a)`|Pass the selected (0-based) arguments of the mock function to action `a` and perform it.                                      |
-|`WithoutArgs(a)`        |Perform action `a` without any arguments.                                                                                     |
+|`WithoutArgs(a)`              |Perform action `a` without any arguments.                                                                                     |
 
 ## Defining Actions ##
 
-| `ACTION(Sum) { return arg0 + arg1; }` | Defines an action `Sum()` to return the sum of the mock function's argument #0 and #1. |
-|:--------------------------------------|:---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
-| `ACTION_P(Plus, n) { return arg0 + n; }` | Defines an action `Plus(n)` to return the sum of the mock function's argument #0 and `n`. |
-| `ACTION_Pk(Foo, p1, ..., pk) { statements; }` | Defines a parameterized action `Foo(p1, ..., pk)` to execute the given `statements`.   |
+| Matcher                                       | Description                                                                               |
+|:----------------------------------------------|:------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
+| `ACTION(Sum) { return arg0 + arg1; }`         | Defines an action `Sum()` to return the sum of the mock function's argument #0 and #1.    |
+| `ACTION_P(Plus, n) { return arg0 + n; }`      | Defines an action `Plus(n)` to return the sum of the mock function's argument #0 and `n`. |
+| `ACTION_Pk(Foo, p1, ..., pk) { statements; }` | Defines a parameterized action `Foo(p1, ..., pk)` to execute the given `statements`.      |
 
 The `ACTION*` macros cannot be used inside a function or class.
 
@@ -437,10 +459,11 @@ The `ACTION*` macros cannot be used inside a function or class.
 
 These are used in `Times()` to specify how many times a mock function will be called:
 
+| Matcher | Description |
+|:--------|:------------|
 |`AnyNumber()`|The function can be called any number of times.|
-|:------------|:----------------------------------------------|
-|`AtLeast(n)` |The call is expected at least `n` times.       |
-|`AtMost(n)`  |The call is expected at most `n` times.        |
+|`AtLeast(n)`|The call is expected at least `n` times.|
+|`AtMost(n)`|The call is expected at most `n` times.|
 |`Between(m, n)`|The call is expected between `m` and `n` (inclusive) times.|
 |`Exactly(n) or n`|The call is expected exactly `n` times. In particular, the call should never happen when `n` is 0.|
 
@@ -453,7 +476,7 @@ together.
 
 ## The After Clause ##
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::Expectation;
 ...
 Expectation init_x = EXPECT_CALL(foo, InitX());
@@ -467,7 +490,7 @@ says that `Bar()` can be called only after both `InitX()` and
 If you don't know how many pre-requisites an expectation has when you
 write it, you can use an `ExpectationSet` to collect them:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::ExpectationSet;
 ...
 ExpectationSet all_inits;
@@ -492,7 +515,7 @@ each expectation in the chain a different name.  <i>All expected<br>
 calls</i> in the same sequence must occur in the order they are
 specified.
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::Sequence;
 Sequence s1, s2;
 ...
@@ -510,7 +533,7 @@ says that `Reset()` must be called before _both_ `GetSize()` _and_
 `Describe()`, and the latter two can occur in any order.
 
 To put many expectations in a sequence conveniently:
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::InSequence;
 {
   InSequence dummy;
@@ -527,7 +550,7 @@ strict order. The name `dummy` is irrelevant.)
 # Verifying and Resetting a Mock #
 
 Google Mock will verify the expectations on a mock object when it is destructed, or you can do it earlier:
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::Mock;
 ...
 // Verifies and removes the expectations on mock_obj;
@@ -542,14 +565,14 @@ Mock::VerifyAndClear(&mock_obj);
 
 You can also tell Google Mock that a mock object can be leaked and doesn't
 need to be verified:
-```
+```cpp
 Mock::AllowLeak(&mock_obj);
 ```
 
 # Mock Classes #
 
 Google Mock defines a convenient mock class template
-```
+```cpp
 class MockFunction<R(A1, ..., An)> {
  public:
   MOCK_METHODn(Call, R(A1, ..., An));
@@ -559,6 +582,7 @@ See this [recipe](CookBook.md#using-check-points) for one application of it.
 
 # Flags #
 
+| Flag | Description |
+|:--------|:------------|
 | `--gmock_catch_leaked_mocks=0` | Don't report leaked mock objects as failures. |
-|:-------------------------------|:----------------------------------------------|
-| `--gmock_verbose=LEVEL`        | Sets the default verbosity level (`info`, `warning`, or `error`) of Google Mock messages. |
+| `--gmock_verbose=LEVEL` | Sets the default verbosity level (`info`, `warning`, or `error`) of Google Mock messages. |
diff --git a/googlemock/docs/CookBook.md b/googlemock/docs/CookBook.md
index 8809b0e..0b36138 100644
--- a/googlemock/docs/CookBook.md
+++ b/googlemock/docs/CookBook.md
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ from outside of the mock class.  (Yes, C++ allows a subclass to specify
 a different access level than the base class on a virtual function.)
 Example:
 
-```
+```cpp
 class Foo {
  public:
   ...
@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ class MockFoo : public Foo {
 
 You can mock overloaded functions as usual. No special attention is required:
 
-```
+```cpp
 class Foo {
   ...
 
@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ class MockFoo : public Foo {
 compiler will give you a warning about some methods in the base class
 being hidden. To fix that, use `using` to bring them in scope:
 
-```
+```cpp
 class MockFoo : public Foo {
   ...
   using Foo::Add;
@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ class MockFoo : public Foo {
 
 To mock a class template, append `_T` to the `MOCK_*` macros:
 
-```
+```cpp
 template <typename Elem>
 class StackInterface {
   ...
@@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ class, your mock class will be _unrelated_ to the real class, but
 contain methods with the same signatures.  The syntax for mocking
 non-virtual methods is the _same_ as mocking virtual methods:
 
-```
+```cpp
 // A simple packet stream class.  None of its members is virtual.
 class ConcretePacketStream {
  public:
@@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ instantiate your template with `ConcretePacketStream` as the type
 argument.  In tests, you will instantiate the same template with
 `MockPacketStream`.  For example, you may write:
 
-```
+```cpp
 template <class PacketStream>
 void CreateConnection(PacketStream* stream) { ... }
 
@@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ Then you can use `CreateConnection<ConcretePacketStream>()` and
 `CreateConnection<MockPacketStream>()` and
 `PacketReader<MockPacketStream>` in tests.
 
-```
+```cpp
   MockPacketStream mock_stream;
   EXPECT_CALL(mock_stream, ...)...;
   .. set more expectations on mock_stream ...
@@ -194,7 +194,7 @@ Instead of calling a free function (say, `OpenFile`) directly,
 introduce an interface for it and have a concrete subclass that calls
 the free function:
 
-```
+```cpp
 class FileInterface {
  public:
   ...
@@ -236,7 +236,7 @@ per-mock-object basis.
 
 Suppose your test uses a mock class `MockFoo`:
 
-```
+```cpp
 TEST(...) {
   MockFoo mock_foo;
   EXPECT_CALL(mock_foo, DoThis());
@@ -249,7 +249,7 @@ reported by Google Mock as a warning. However, if you rewrite your
 test to use `NiceMock<MockFoo>` instead, the warning will be gone,
 resulting in a cleaner test output:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::NiceMock;
 
 TEST(...) {
@@ -265,7 +265,7 @@ wherever `MockFoo` is accepted.
 It also works if `MockFoo`'s constructor takes some arguments, as
 `NiceMock<MockFoo>` "inherits" `MockFoo`'s constructors:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::NiceMock;
 
 TEST(...) {
@@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ TEST(...) {
 The usage of `StrictMock` is similar, except that it makes all
 uninteresting calls failures:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::StrictMock;
 
 TEST(...) {
@@ -305,7 +305,7 @@ Finally, you should be **very cautious** about when to use naggy or strict mocks
 Sometimes a method has a long list of arguments that is mostly
 uninteresting. For example,
 
-```
+```cpp
 class LogSink {
  public:
   ...
@@ -324,7 +324,7 @@ it, which is often infeasible.
 
 The trick is to re-dispatch the method in the mock class:
 
-```
+```cpp
 class ScopedMockLog : public LogSink {
  public:
   ...
@@ -403,7 +403,7 @@ applicable in a wide variety of situations. :-)
 Some times you have a non-trivial fake implementation of an
 interface. For example:
 
-```
+```cpp
 class Foo {
  public:
   virtual ~Foo() {}
@@ -433,7 +433,7 @@ When you define the mock class using Google Mock, you can have it
 delegate its default action to a fake class you already have, using
 this pattern:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::Invoke;
 
@@ -460,7 +460,7 @@ With that, you can use `MockFoo` in your tests as usual. Just remember
 that if you don't explicitly set an action in an `ON_CALL()` or
 `EXPECT_CALL()`, the fake will be called upon to do it:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 
 TEST(AbcTest, Xyz) {
@@ -515,7 +515,7 @@ ability to validate calls. This technique is very similar to the
 delegating-to-fake technique, the difference being that we use a real
 object instead of a fake. Here's an example:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::AtLeast;
 using ::testing::Invoke;
@@ -559,7 +559,7 @@ Ideally, you should code to interfaces, whose methods are all pure
 virtual. In reality, sometimes you do need to mock a virtual method
 that is not pure (i.e, it already has an implementation). For example:
 
-```
+```cpp
 class Foo {
  public:
   virtual ~Foo();
@@ -586,7 +586,7 @@ whenever you don't need to mock one of its methods).
 The trick is to leave a back door in your mock class for accessing the
 real methods in the base class:
 
-```
+```cpp
 class MockFoo : public Foo {
  public:
   // Mocking a pure method.
@@ -601,7 +601,7 @@ class MockFoo : public Foo {
 
 Now, you can call `Foo::Concrete()` inside an action by:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::Invoke;
 ...
@@ -611,7 +611,7 @@ using ::testing::Invoke;
 
 or tell the mock object that you don't want to mock `Concrete()`:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::Invoke;
 ...
   ON_CALL(foo, Concrete(_))
@@ -629,7 +629,7 @@ works.)
 
 You can specify exactly which arguments a mock method is expecting:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::Return;
 ...
   EXPECT_CALL(foo, DoThis(5))
@@ -641,7 +641,7 @@ using ::testing::Return;
 
 You can use matchers to match arguments that have a certain property:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::Ge;
 using ::testing::NotNull;
 using ::testing::Return;
@@ -654,7 +654,7 @@ using ::testing::Return;
 
 A frequently used matcher is `_`, which matches anything:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::NotNull;
 ...
@@ -666,7 +666,7 @@ using ::testing::NotNull;
 You can build complex matchers from existing ones using `AllOf()`,
 `AnyOf()`, and `Not()`:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::AllOf;
 using ::testing::Gt;
 using ::testing::HasSubstr;
@@ -710,7 +710,7 @@ The code won't compile if any of these conditions aren't met.
 
 Here's one example:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::SafeMatcherCast;
 
 // A base class and a child class.
@@ -744,7 +744,7 @@ need some help on which overloaded version it is.
 To disambiguate functions overloaded on the const-ness of this object,
 use the `Const()` argument wrapper.
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::ReturnRef;
 
 class MockFoo : public Foo {
@@ -771,7 +771,7 @@ of a matcher, either by wrapping your matcher in `Matcher<type>()`, or
 using a matcher whose type is fixed (`TypedEq<type>`, `An<type>()`,
 etc):
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::An;
 using ::testing::Lt;
 using ::testing::Matcher;
@@ -803,7 +803,7 @@ still active will be selected (think "newer overrides older"). So, you
 can make a method do different things depending on its argument values
 like this:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::Lt;
 using ::testing::Return;
@@ -827,7 +827,7 @@ example, we may want to say that the first argument must be less than
 the second argument. The `With()` clause allows us to match
 all arguments of a mock function as a whole. For example,
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::Lt;
 using ::testing::Ne;
@@ -850,7 +850,7 @@ than `.With(Lt())`.
 You can use `Args<k1, ..., kn>(m)` to match the `n` selected arguments
 (as a tuple) against `m`. For example,
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::AllOf;
 using ::testing::Args;
@@ -882,7 +882,7 @@ participate.
 Luckily, you can use a matcher where a unary predicate functor is
 expected by wrapping it inside the `Matches()` function. For example,
 
-```
+```cpp
 #include <algorithm>
 #include <vector>
 
@@ -898,7 +898,7 @@ predicates (doing the same using STL's `<functional>` header is just
 painful). For example, here's a predicate that's satisfied by any
 number that is >= 0, <= 100, and != 50:
 
-```
+```cpp
 Matches(AllOf(Ge(0), Le(100), Ne(50)))
 ```
 
@@ -909,14 +909,14 @@ themselves, there is a way to take advantage of them in
 [Google Test](../../googletest/) assertions. It's
 called `ASSERT_THAT` and `EXPECT_THAT`:
 
-```
+```cpp
   ASSERT_THAT(value, matcher);  // Asserts that value matches matcher.
   EXPECT_THAT(value, matcher);  // The non-fatal version.
 ```
 
 For example, in a Google Test test you can write:
 
-```
+```cpp
 #include "gmock/gmock.h"
 
 using ::testing::AllOf;
@@ -960,7 +960,7 @@ as a matcher - as long as the predicate accepts a value of the type
 you want. You do this by wrapping the predicate inside the `Truly()`
 function, for example:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::Truly;
 
 int IsEven(int n) { return (n % 2) == 0 ? 1 : 0; }
@@ -990,7 +990,7 @@ away from it if you can guarantee that `bar` won't be changed after
 the `EXPECT_CALL()` is executed. Just tell Google Mock that it should
 save a reference to `bar`, instead of a copy of it. Here's how:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::Eq;
 using ::testing::ByRef;
 using ::testing::Lt;
@@ -1014,14 +1014,14 @@ you may need to validate a certain member variable or the result of a
 certain getter method of the object. You can do this with `Field()`
 and `Property()`. More specifically,
 
-```
+```cpp
 Field(&Foo::bar, m)
 ```
 
 is a matcher that matches a `Foo` object whose `bar` member variable
 satisfies matcher `m`.
 
-```
+```cpp
 Property(&Foo::baz, m)
 ```
 
@@ -1041,7 +1041,7 @@ argument and be declared as `const`.
 BTW, `Field()` and `Property()` can also match plain pointers to
 objects. For instance,
 
-```
+```cpp
 Field(&Foo::number, Ge(3))
 ```
 
@@ -1062,7 +1062,7 @@ Well, you can use the `Pointee(m)` matcher.
 `Pointee(m)` matches a pointer iff `m` matches the value the pointer
 points to. For example:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::Ge;
 using ::testing::Pointee;
 ...
@@ -1075,7 +1075,7 @@ greater than or equal to 3.
 One nice thing about `Pointee()` is that it treats a `NULL` pointer as
 a match failure, so you can write `Pointee(m)` instead of
 
-```
+```cpp
   AllOf(NotNull(), Pointee(m))
 ```
 
@@ -1102,7 +1102,7 @@ which has an `int bar()` method and an `int baz()` method, and you
 want to constrain that the argument's `bar()` value plus its `baz()`
 value is a given number. Here's how you can define a matcher to do it:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::MatcherInterface;
 using ::testing::MatchResultListener;
 
@@ -1153,7 +1153,7 @@ container out-of-line is a bit of a hassle.
 You can use the `ElementsAre()` or `UnorderedElementsAre()` matcher in
 such cases:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::ElementsAre;
 using ::testing::Gt;
@@ -1170,7 +1170,7 @@ must be 1, greater than 0, anything, and 5 respectively.
 
 If you instead write:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::Gt;
 using ::testing::UnorderedElementsAre;
@@ -1190,7 +1190,7 @@ to 10 arguments. If more are needed, you can place them in a C-style
 array and use `ElementsAreArray()` or `UnorderedElementsAreArray()`
 instead:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::ElementsAreArray;
 ...
 
@@ -1207,7 +1207,7 @@ In case the array needs to be dynamically created (and therefore the
 array size cannot be inferred by the compiler), you can give
 `ElementsAreArray()` an additional argument to specify the array size:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::ElementsAreArray;
 ...
   int* const expected_vector3 = new int[count];
@@ -1234,7 +1234,7 @@ Therefore, if you have some complex matcher that you want to use again
 and again, there is no need to build it every time. Just assign it to a
 matcher variable and use that variable repeatedly! For example,
 
-```
+```cpp
   Matcher<int> in_range = AllOf(Gt(5), Le(10));
   ... use in_range as a matcher in multiple EXPECT_CALLs ...
 ```
@@ -1277,7 +1277,7 @@ any `EXPECT_CALL()` statement, it will be an error.
 
 If a mock method shouldn't be called at all, explicitly say so:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 ...
   EXPECT_CALL(foo, Bar(_))
@@ -1287,7 +1287,7 @@ using ::testing::_;
 If some calls to the method are allowed, but the rest are not, just
 list all the expected calls:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::AnyNumber;
 using ::testing::Gt;
 ...
@@ -1319,7 +1319,7 @@ A **strict mock** turns uninteresting call warnings into errors. So making a moc
 
 Let's look at an example:
 
-```
+```cpp
 TEST(...) {
   NiceMock<MockDomainRegistry> mock_registry;
   EXPECT_CALL(mock_registry, GetDomainOwner("google.com"))
@@ -1334,7 +1334,7 @@ The sole `EXPECT_CALL` here says that all calls to `GetDomainOwner()` must have
 
 So how do we tell Google Mock that `GetDomainOwner()` can be called with some other arguments as well? The standard technique is to add a "catch all" `EXPECT_CALL`:
 
-```
+```cpp
   EXPECT_CALL(mock_registry, GetDomainOwner(_))
         .Times(AnyNumber());  // catches all other calls to this method.
   EXPECT_CALL(mock_registry, GetDomainOwner("google.com"))
@@ -1360,7 +1360,7 @@ If you would rather have all calls occur in the order of the
 expectations, put the `EXPECT_CALL()` statements in a block where you
 define a variable of type `InSequence`:
 
-```
+```cpp
   using ::testing::_;
   using ::testing::InSequence;
 
@@ -1411,7 +1411,7 @@ things: first to define some `Sequence` objects, and then for each
 of. Expectations in the same sequence must occur in the order they are
 written. For example,
 
-```
+```cpp
   using ::testing::Sequence;
 
   Sequence s1, s2;
@@ -1447,7 +1447,7 @@ that are still active. An expectation is active when created, and
 becomes inactive (aka _retires_) when a call that has to occur later
 has occurred. For example, in
 
-```
+```cpp
   using ::testing::_;
   using ::testing::Sequence;
 
@@ -1468,7 +1468,7 @@ as soon as either #2 or #3 is matched, #1 will retire. If a warning
 Note that an expectation doesn't retire automatically when it's
 saturated. For example,
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 ...
   EXPECT_CALL(log, Log(WARNING, _, _));                  // #1
@@ -1482,7 +1482,7 @@ match again and result in an upper-bound-violated error.
 If this is not what you want, you can ask an expectation to retire as
 soon as it becomes saturated:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 ...
   EXPECT_CALL(log, Log(WARNING, _, _));                 // #1
@@ -1501,7 +1501,7 @@ will match #1 - there will be no error.
 If a mock function's return type is a reference, you need to use
 `ReturnRef()` instead of `Return()` to return a result:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::ReturnRef;
 
 class MockFoo : public Foo {
@@ -1531,7 +1531,7 @@ as doing that usually indicates a user error. So, what shall you do?
 
 You may be tempted to try `ByRef()`:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using testing::ByRef;
 using testing::Return;
 
@@ -1568,7 +1568,7 @@ and `Return(ByRef(x))` will always return 0.
 specifically. It returns the value pointed to by `pointer` at the time
 the action is _executed_:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using testing::ReturnPointee;
 ...
   int x = 0;
@@ -1585,7 +1585,7 @@ Want to do more than one thing when a function is called? That's
 fine. `DoAll()` allow you to do sequence of actions every time. Only
 the return value of the last action in the sequence will be used.
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::DoAll;
 
 class MockFoo : public Foo {
@@ -1611,7 +1611,7 @@ define your own action by implementing `::testing::ActionInterface`.
 If all you need to do is to change an output argument, the built-in
 `SetArgPointee()` action is convenient:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::SetArgPointee;
 
 class MockMutator : public Mutator {
@@ -1638,7 +1638,7 @@ constructor and assignment operator.
 If the mock method also needs to return a value as well, you can chain
 `SetArgPointee()` with `Return()` using `DoAll()`:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::Return;
 using ::testing::SetArgPointee;
@@ -1661,7 +1661,7 @@ If the output argument is an array, use the
 elements in source range `[first, last)` to the array pointed to by
 the `N`-th (0-based) argument:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::NotNull;
 using ::testing::SetArrayArgument;
 
@@ -1680,7 +1680,7 @@ class MockArrayMutator : public ArrayMutator {
 
 This also works when the argument is an output iterator:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::SetArrayArgument;
 
@@ -1704,7 +1704,7 @@ class MockRolodex : public Rolodex {
 
 If you expect a call to change the behavior of a mock object, you can use `::testing::InSequence` to specify different behaviors before and after the call:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::InSequence;
 using ::testing::Return;
 
@@ -1724,7 +1724,7 @@ This makes `my_mock.IsDirty()` return `true` before `my_mock.Flush()` is called
 
 If the behavior change is more complex, you can store the effects in a variable and make a mock method get its return value from that variable:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::SaveArg;
 using ::testing::Return;
@@ -1754,7 +1754,7 @@ to specify a default value for types Google Mock doesn't know
 about. You can do this using the `::testing::DefaultValue` class
 template:
 
-```
+```cpp
 class MockFoo : public Foo {
  public:
   MOCK_METHOD0(CalculateBar, Bar());
@@ -1790,7 +1790,7 @@ have two mock methods with the same return type and you want them to
 have different behaviors. The `ON_CALL()` macro allows you to
 customize your mock's behavior at the method level:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::AnyNumber;
 using ::testing::Gt;
@@ -1823,7 +1823,7 @@ specialize the mock's behavior later.
 If the built-in actions don't suit you, you can easily use an existing
 function, method, or functor as an action:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::Invoke;
 
@@ -1878,7 +1878,7 @@ tedious and obscures the intent of the test.
 that it doesn't pass the mock function's arguments to the
 callee. Here's an example:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::InvokeWithoutArgs;
 
@@ -1902,7 +1902,7 @@ bool Job1() { ... }
 Sometimes a mock function will receive a function pointer or a functor
 (in other words, a "callable") as an argument, e.g.
 
-```
+```cpp
 class MockFoo : public Foo {
  public:
   MOCK_METHOD2(DoThis, bool(int n, bool (*fp)(int)));
@@ -1911,7 +1911,7 @@ class MockFoo : public Foo {
 
 and you may want to invoke this callable argument:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 ...
   MockFoo foo;
@@ -1927,7 +1927,7 @@ Or do you really?
 
 Well, Google Mock has an action to solve _exactly_ this problem:
 
-```
+```cpp
   InvokeArgument<N>(arg_1, arg_2, ..., arg_m)
 ```
 
@@ -1937,7 +1937,7 @@ a function pointer or a functor, Google Mock handles them both.
 
 With that, you could write:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::InvokeArgument;
 ...
@@ -1950,7 +1950,7 @@ using ::testing::InvokeArgument;
 What if the callable takes an argument by reference? No problem - just
 wrap it inside `ByRef()`:
 
-```
+```cpp
 ...
   MOCK_METHOD1(Bar, bool(bool (*fp)(int, const Helper&)));
 ...
@@ -1974,7 +1974,7 @@ copy_ of the argument, and pass a _reference to the copy_, instead of
 a reference to the original value, to the callable. This is especially
 handy when the argument is a temporary value:
 
-```
+```cpp
 ...
   MOCK_METHOD1(DoThat, bool(bool (*f)(const double& x, const string& s)));
 ...
@@ -2001,7 +2001,7 @@ function that returns `void`, or perhaps it needs to be used in
 `DoAll()` and it's not the last in the list). `IgnoreResult()` lets
 you do that. For example:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::Invoke;
 using ::testing::Return;
@@ -2038,7 +2038,7 @@ Say you have a mock function `Foo()` that takes seven arguments, and
 you have a custom action that you want to invoke when `Foo()` is
 called. Trouble is, the custom action only wants three arguments:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::Invoke;
 ...
@@ -2060,7 +2060,7 @@ To please the compiler God, you can to define an "adaptor" that has
 the same signature as `Foo()` and calls the custom action with the
 right arguments:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::Invoke;
 
@@ -2081,7 +2081,7 @@ Google Mock provides a generic _action adaptor_, so you can spend your
 time minding more important business than writing your own
 adaptors. Here's the syntax:
 
-```
+```cpp
   WithArgs<N1, N2, ..., Nk>(action)
 ```
 
@@ -2089,7 +2089,7 @@ creates an action that passes the arguments of the mock function at
 the given indices (0-based) to the inner `action` and performs
 it. Using `WithArgs`, our original example can be written as:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::Invoke;
 using ::testing::WithArgs;
@@ -2129,14 +2129,14 @@ case the types of the uninteresting arguments change. It could also
 increase the chance the action function can be reused. For example,
 given
 
-```
+```cpp
   MOCK_METHOD3(Foo, double(const string& label, double x, double y));
   MOCK_METHOD3(Bar, double(int index, double x, double y));
 ```
 
 instead of
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::Invoke;
 
@@ -2157,7 +2157,7 @@ double DistanceToOriginWithIndex(int index, double x, double y) {
 
 you could write
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 using ::testing::Invoke;
 using ::testing::Unused;
@@ -2187,7 +2187,7 @@ doesn't have an internal state (i.e. if it always does the same thing
 no matter how many times it has been called), you can assign it to an
 action variable and use that variable repeatedly. For example:
 
-```
+```cpp
   Action<bool(int*)> set_flag = DoAll(SetArgPointee<0>(5),
                                       Return(true));
   ... use set_flag in .WillOnce() and .WillRepeatedly() ...
@@ -2200,7 +2200,7 @@ returns a counter whose initial value is `init`, using two actions
 created from the same expression and using a shared action will
 exihibit different behaviors. Example:
 
-```
+```cpp
   EXPECT_CALL(foo, DoThis())
       .WillRepeatedly(IncrementCounter(0));
   EXPECT_CALL(foo, DoThat())
@@ -2213,7 +2213,7 @@ exihibit different behaviors. Example:
 
 versus
 
-```
+```cpp
   Action<int()> increment = IncrementCounter(0);
 
   EXPECT_CALL(foo, DoThis())
@@ -2420,7 +2420,7 @@ and destructor once, resulting in a much faster compilation.
 Let's illustrate the idea using an example. Here's the definition of a
 mock class before applying this recipe:
 
-```
+```cpp
 // File mock_foo.h.
 ...
 class MockFoo : public Foo {
@@ -2437,7 +2437,7 @@ class MockFoo : public Foo {
 
 After the change, it would look like:
 
-```
+```cpp
 // File mock_foo.h.
 ...
 class MockFoo : public Foo {
@@ -2452,7 +2452,7 @@ class MockFoo : public Foo {
 };
 ```
 and
-```
+```cpp
 // File mock_foo.cpp.
 #include "path/to/mock_foo.h"
 
@@ -2484,7 +2484,7 @@ to _force_ Google Mock to verify a mock object before it is
 (hopefully) destructed. You can do this with
 `Mock::VerifyAndClearExpectations(&mock_object)`:
 
-```
+```cpp
 TEST(MyServerTest, ProcessesRequest) {
   using ::testing::Mock;
 
@@ -2537,7 +2537,7 @@ function at specific places. Then you can verify that the mock
 function calls do happen at the right time. For example, if you are
 exercising code:
 
-```
+```cpp
 Foo(1);
 Foo(2);
 Foo(3);
@@ -2546,7 +2546,7 @@ Foo(3);
 and want to verify that `Foo(1)` and `Foo(3)` both invoke
 `mock.Bar("a")`, but `Foo(2)` doesn't invoke anything. You can write:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::MockFunction;
 
 TEST(FooTest, InvokesBarCorrectly) {
@@ -2588,7 +2588,7 @@ This sounds simple, except for one problem: a destructor is a special
 function with special syntax and special semantics, and the
 `MOCK_METHOD0` macro doesn't work for it:
 
-```
+```cpp
   MOCK_METHOD0(~MockFoo, void());  // Won't compile!
 ```
 
@@ -2596,7 +2596,7 @@ The good news is that you can use a simple pattern to achieve the same
 effect. First, add a mock function `Die()` to your mock class and call
 it in the destructor, like this:
 
-```
+```cpp
 class MockFoo : public Foo {
   ...
   // Add the following two lines to the mock class.
@@ -2609,7 +2609,7 @@ class MockFoo : public Foo {
 name.) Now, we have translated the problem of testing when a `MockFoo`
 object dies to testing when its `Die()` method is called:
 
-```
+```cpp
   MockFoo* foo = new MockFoo;
   MockBar* bar = new MockBar;
   ...
@@ -2664,7 +2664,7 @@ behavior. That's not fun, so don't do it.
 Google Mock guarantees that the action for a mock function is done in
 the same thread that called the mock function. For example, in
 
-```
+```cpp
   EXPECT_CALL(mock, Foo(1))
       .WillOnce(action1);
   EXPECT_CALL(mock, Foo(2))
@@ -2715,7 +2715,7 @@ with three possible values:
 Alternatively, you can adjust the value of that flag from within your
 tests like so:
 
-```
+```cpp
   ::testing::FLAGS_gmock_verbose = "error";
 ```
 
@@ -2737,7 +2737,7 @@ which `EXPECT_CALL` Google Mock thinks it matches?
 You can unlock this power by running your test with the
 `--gmock_verbose=info` flag. For example, given the test program:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using testing::_;
 using testing::HasSubstr;
 using testing::Return;
@@ -2831,7 +2831,7 @@ against them.
 The `MATCHER*` family of macros can be used to define custom matchers
 easily.  The syntax:
 
-```
+```cpp
 MATCHER(name, description_string_expression) { statements; }
 ```
 
@@ -2852,16 +2852,16 @@ in which case Google Mock will use the sequence of words in the
 matcher name as the description.
 
 For example:
-```
+```cpp
 MATCHER(IsDivisibleBy7, "") { return (arg % 7) == 0; }
 ```
 allows you to write
-```
+```cpp
   // Expects mock_foo.Bar(n) to be called where n is divisible by 7.
   EXPECT_CALL(mock_foo, Bar(IsDivisibleBy7()));
 ```
 or,
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::Not;
 ...
   EXPECT_THAT(some_expression, IsDivisibleBy7());
@@ -2884,7 +2884,7 @@ by 7)"` are automatically calculated from the matcher name
 As you may have noticed, the auto-generated descriptions (especially
 those for the negation) may not be so great. You can always override
 them with a string expression of your own:
-```
+```cpp
 MATCHER(IsDivisibleBy7, std::string(negation ? "isn't" : "is") +
                         " divisible by 7") {
   return (arg % 7) == 0;
@@ -2894,7 +2894,7 @@ MATCHER(IsDivisibleBy7, std::string(negation ? "isn't" : "is") +
 Optionally, you can stream additional information to a hidden argument
 named `result_listener` to explain the match result. For example, a
 better definition of `IsDivisibleBy7` is:
-```
+```cpp
 MATCHER(IsDivisibleBy7, "") {
   if ((arg % 7) == 0)
     return true;
@@ -2927,18 +2927,18 @@ Google Mock already prints it for you.
 
 Sometimes you'll want to define a matcher that has parameters.  For that you
 can use the macro:
-```
+```cpp
 MATCHER_P(name, param_name, description_string) { statements; }
 ```
 where the description string can be either `""` or a string expression
 that references `negation` and `param_name`.
 
 For example:
-```
+```cpp
 MATCHER_P(HasAbsoluteValue, value, "") { return abs(arg) == value; }
 ```
 will allow you to write:
-```
+```cpp
   EXPECT_THAT(Blah("a"), HasAbsoluteValue(n));
 ```
 which may lead to this message (assuming `n` is 10):
@@ -2958,7 +2958,7 @@ body of `MATCHER_P(HasAbsoluteValue, value)` above, you can write
 
 Google Mock also provides `MATCHER_P2`, `MATCHER_P3`, ..., up to
 `MATCHER_P10` to support multi-parameter matchers:
-```
+```cpp
 MATCHER_Pk(name, param_1, ..., param_k, description_string) { statements; }
 ```
 
@@ -2970,7 +2970,7 @@ referencing the matcher parameters in the description string
 expression.
 
 For example,
-```
+```cpp
   using ::testing::PrintToString;
   MATCHER_P2(InClosedRange, low, hi,
              std::string(negation ? "isn't" : "is") + " in range [" +
@@ -2988,7 +2988,7 @@ would generate a failure that contains the message:
 If you specify `""` as the description, the failure message will
 contain the sequence of words in the matcher name followed by the
 parameter values printed as a tuple.  For example,
-```
+```cpp
   MATCHER_P2(InClosedRange, low, hi, "") { ... }
   ...
   EXPECT_THAT(3, InClosedRange(4, 6));
@@ -2999,11 +2999,11 @@ would generate a failure that contains the text:
 ```
 
 For the purpose of typing, you can view
-```
+```cpp
 MATCHER_Pk(Foo, p1, ..., pk, description_string) { ... }
 ```
 as shorthand for
-```
+```cpp
 template <typename p1_type, ..., typename pk_type>
 FooMatcherPk<p1_type, ..., pk_type>
 Foo(p1_type p1, ..., pk_type pk) { ... }
@@ -3032,7 +3032,7 @@ matcher you will see the value of the referenced object but not its
 address.
 
 You can overload matchers with different numbers of parameters:
-```
+```cpp
 MATCHER_P(Blah, a, description_string_1) { ... }
 MATCHER_P2(Blah, a, b, description_string_2) { ... }
 ```
@@ -3058,7 +3058,7 @@ error messages when expectations are violated.
 
 The interface looks like this:
 
-```
+```cpp
 class MatchResultListener {
  public:
   ...
@@ -3098,7 +3098,7 @@ strictly needed but it makes the syntax of using the matcher nicer.
 
 For example, you can define a matcher to test whether an `int` is
 divisible by 7 and then use it like this:
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::MakeMatcher;
 using ::testing::Matcher;
 using ::testing::MatcherInterface;
@@ -3130,7 +3130,7 @@ inline Matcher<int> DivisibleBy7() {
 You may improve the matcher message by streaming additional
 information to the `listener` argument in `MatchAndExplain()`:
 
-```
+```cpp
 class DivisibleBy7Matcher : public MatcherInterface<int> {
  public:
   virtual bool MatchAndExplain(int n,
@@ -3167,7 +3167,7 @@ Fortunately, most of the time you can define a polymorphic matcher
 easily with the help of `MakePolymorphicMatcher()`. Here's how you can
 define `NotNull()` as an example:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::MakePolymorphicMatcher;
 using ::testing::MatchResultListener;
 using ::testing::NotNull;
@@ -3224,7 +3224,7 @@ If the built-in set of cardinalities doesn't suit you, you are free to
 define your own by implementing the following interface (in namespace
 `testing`):
 
-```
+```cpp
 class CardinalityInterface {
  public:
   virtual ~CardinalityInterface();
@@ -3243,7 +3243,7 @@ class CardinalityInterface {
 For example, to specify that a call must occur even number of times,
 you can write
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::Cardinality;
 using ::testing::CardinalityInterface;
 using ::testing::MakeCardinality;
@@ -3280,7 +3280,7 @@ family to quickly define a new action that can be used in your code as
 if it's a built-in action.
 
 By writing
-```
+```cpp
 ACTION(name) { statements; }
 ```
 in a namespace scope (i.e. not inside a class or function), you will
@@ -3288,11 +3288,11 @@ define an action with the given name that executes the statements.
 The value returned by `statements` will be used as the return value of
 the action.  Inside the statements, you can refer to the K-th
 (0-based) argument of the mock function as `argK`.  For example:
-```
+```cpp
 ACTION(IncrementArg1) { return ++(*arg1); }
 ```
 allows you to write
-```
+```cpp
 ... WillOnce(IncrementArg1());
 ```
 
@@ -3303,7 +3303,7 @@ operator, or if the type of `++(*arg1)` isn't compatible with the mock
 function's return type.
 
 Another example:
-```
+```cpp
 ACTION(Foo) {
   (*arg2)(5);
   Blah();
@@ -3318,15 +3318,15 @@ with 5, calls function `Blah()`, sets the value pointed to by argument
 For more convenience and flexibility, you can also use the following
 pre-defined symbols in the body of `ACTION`:
 
-| `argK_type` | The type of the K-th (0-based) argument of the mock function |
-|:------------|:-------------------------------------------------------------|
-| `args`      | All arguments of the mock function as a tuple                |
-| `args_type` | The type of all arguments of the mock function as a tuple    |
-| `return_type` | The return type of the mock function                         |
+| `argK_type`     | The type of the K-th (0-based) argument of the mock function |
+|:----------------|:-------------------------------------------------------------|
+| `args`          | All arguments of the mock function as a tuple                |
+| `args_type`     | The type of all arguments of the mock function as a tuple    |
+| `return_type`   | The return type of the mock function                         |
 | `function_type` | The type of the mock function                                |
 
 For example, when using an `ACTION` as a stub action for mock function:
-```
+```cpp
 int DoSomething(bool flag, int* ptr);
 ```
 we have:
@@ -3346,16 +3346,16 @@ we have:
 
 Sometimes you'll want to parameterize an action you define.  For that
 we have another macro
-```
+```cpp
 ACTION_P(name, param) { statements; }
 ```
 
 For example,
-```
+```cpp
 ACTION_P(Add, n) { return arg0 + n; }
 ```
 will allow you to write
-```
+```cpp
 // Returns argument #0 + 5.
 ... WillOnce(Add(5));
 ```
@@ -3372,7 +3372,7 @@ parameter as inferred by the compiler.  For example, in the body of
 
 Google Mock also provides `ACTION_P2`, `ACTION_P3`, and etc to support
 multi-parameter actions.  For example,
-```
+```cpp
 ACTION_P2(ReturnDistanceTo, x, y) {
   double dx = arg0 - x;
   double dy = arg1 - y;
@@ -3380,7 +3380,7 @@ ACTION_P2(ReturnDistanceTo, x, y) {
 }
 ```
 lets you write
-```
+```cpp
 ... WillOnce(ReturnDistanceTo(5.0, 26.5));
 ```
 
@@ -3388,7 +3388,7 @@ You can view `ACTION` as a degenerated parameterized action where the
 number of parameters is 0.
 
 You can also easily define actions overloaded on the number of parameters:
-```
+```cpp
 ACTION_P(Plus, a) { ... }
 ACTION_P2(Plus, a, b) { ... }
 ```
@@ -3401,7 +3401,7 @@ parameters.  Instead, we let the compiler infer the types for us.
 
 Sometimes, however, we may want to be more explicit about the types.
 There are several tricks to do that.  For example:
-```
+```cpp
 ACTION(Foo) {
   // Makes sure arg0 can be converted to int.
   int n = arg0;
@@ -3427,7 +3427,7 @@ supports that and can be viewed as an extension to `ACTION()` and
 `ACTION_P*()`.
 
 The syntax:
-```
+```cpp
 ACTION_TEMPLATE(ActionName,
                 HAS_m_TEMPLATE_PARAMS(kind1, name1, ..., kind_m, name_m),
                 AND_n_VALUE_PARAMS(p1, ..., p_n)) { statements; }
@@ -3441,7 +3441,7 @@ integral constant, or a template.  `p_i` is the name of the i-th value
 parameter.
 
 Example:
-```
+```cpp
 // DuplicateArg<k, T>(output) converts the k-th argument of the mock
 // function to type T and copies it to *output.
 ACTION_TEMPLATE(DuplicateArg,
@@ -3453,13 +3453,13 @@ ACTION_TEMPLATE(DuplicateArg,
 ```
 
 To create an instance of an action template, write:
-```
+```cpp
   ActionName<t1, ..., t_m>(v1, ..., v_n)
 ```
 where the `t`s are the template arguments and the
 `v`s are the value arguments.  The value argument
 types are inferred by the compiler.  For example:
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 ...
   int n;
@@ -3469,7 +3469,7 @@ using ::testing::_;
 
 If you want to explicitly specify the value argument types, you can
 provide additional template arguments:
-```
+```cpp
   ActionName<t1, ..., t_m, u1, ..., u_k>(v1, ..., v_n)
 ```
 where `u_i` is the desired type of `v_i`.
@@ -3479,7 +3479,7 @@ number of value parameters, but not on the number of template
 parameters.  Without the restriction, the meaning of the following is
 unclear:
 
-```
+```cpp
   OverloadedAction<int, bool>(x);
 ```
 
@@ -3495,13 +3495,13 @@ the action and the parameter types.  The rule is relatively simple:
 
 | **Given Definition** | **Expression** | **Has Type** |
 |:---------------------|:---------------|:-------------|
-| `ACTION(Foo)`        | `Foo()`        | `FooAction`  |
+| `ACTION(Foo)` | `Foo()` | `FooAction` |
 | `ACTION_TEMPLATE(Foo, HAS_m_TEMPLATE_PARAMS(...), AND_0_VALUE_PARAMS())` |	`Foo<t1, ..., t_m>()` | `FooAction<t1, ..., t_m>` |
 | `ACTION_P(Bar, param)` | `Bar(int_value)` | `BarActionP<int>` |
 | `ACTION_TEMPLATE(Bar, HAS_m_TEMPLATE_PARAMS(...), AND_1_VALUE_PARAMS(p1))` | `Bar<t1, ..., t_m>(int_value)` | `FooActionP<t1, ..., t_m, int>` |
 | `ACTION_P2(Baz, p1, p2)` | `Baz(bool_value, int_value)` | `BazActionP2<bool, int>` |
 | `ACTION_TEMPLATE(Baz, HAS_m_TEMPLATE_PARAMS(...), AND_2_VALUE_PARAMS(p1, p2))`| `Baz<t1, ..., t_m>(bool_value, int_value)` | `FooActionP2<t1, ..., t_m, bool, int>` |
-| ...                  | ...            | ...          |
+| ... | ... | ... |
 
 Note that we have to pick different suffixes (`Action`, `ActionP`,
 `ActionP2`, and etc) for actions with different numbers of value
@@ -3522,7 +3522,7 @@ An alternative to the `ACTION*` macros is to implement
 `::testing::ActionInterface<F>`, where `F` is the type of the mock
 function in which the action will be used. For example:
 
-```
+```cpp
 template <typename F>class ActionInterface {
  public:
   virtual ~ActionInterface();
@@ -3574,7 +3574,7 @@ If an action can be used in several types of mock functions, we say
 it's _polymorphic_. The `MakePolymorphicAction()` function template
 makes it easy to define such an action:
 
-```
+```cpp
 namespace testing {
 
 template <typename Impl>
@@ -3587,7 +3587,7 @@ As an example, let's define an action that returns the second argument
 in the mock function's argument list. The first step is to define an
 implementation class:
 
-```
+```cpp
 class ReturnSecondArgumentAction {
  public:
   template <typename Result, typename ArgumentTuple>
@@ -3611,7 +3611,7 @@ Next, we use `MakePolymorphicAction()` to turn an instance of the
 implementation class into the polymorphic action we need. It will be
 convenient to have a wrapper for this:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::MakePolymorphicAction;
 using ::testing::PolymorphicAction;
 
@@ -3623,7 +3623,7 @@ PolymorphicAction<ReturnSecondArgumentAction> ReturnSecondArgument() {
 Now, you can use this polymorphic action the same way you use the
 built-in ones:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 
 class MockFoo : public Foo {
diff --git a/googlemock/docs/DesignDoc.md b/googlemock/docs/DesignDoc.md
index 3f515c3..4cddc9d 100644
--- a/googlemock/docs/DesignDoc.md
+++ b/googlemock/docs/DesignDoc.md
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ non-trivial effort to define a custom action in Google Mock.  For
 example, suppose you want to "increment the value pointed to by the
 second argument of the mock function and return it", you could write:
 
-```
+```cpp
 int IncrementArg1(Unused, int* p, Unused) {
   return ++(*p);
 }
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ There are several things unsatisfactory about this approach:
 The latter two problems can be overcome using `MakePolymorphicAction()`,
 but it requires much more boilerplate code:
 
-```
+```cpp
 class IncrementArg1Action {
  public:
   template <typename Result, typename ArgumentTuple>
@@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ boiler-plate C++ requires.
 ## Solution ##
 
 We propose to introduce a new macro:
-```
+```cpp
 ACTION(name) { statements; }
 ```
 
@@ -58,11 +58,11 @@ Using this in a namespace scope will define an action with the given
 name that executes the statements.  Inside the statements, you can
 refer to the K-th (0-based) argument of the mock function as `argK`.
 For example:
-```
+```cpp
 ACTION(IncrementArg1) { return ++(*arg1); }
 ```
 allows you to write
-```
+```cpp
 ... WillOnce(IncrementArg1());
 ```
 
@@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ your code is still type-safe though: you'll get a compiler error if
 `++(*arg1)` isn't compatible with the mock function's return type.
 
 Another example:
-```
+```cpp
 ACTION(Foo) {
   (*arg2)(5);
   Blah();
@@ -88,18 +88,20 @@ with 5, calls function `Blah()`, sets the value pointed to by argument
 For more convenience and flexibility, you can also use the following
 pre-defined symbols in the body of `ACTION`:
 
-| `argK_type` | The type of the K-th (0-based) argument of the mock function |
-|:------------|:-------------------------------------------------------------|
-| `args`      | All arguments of the mock function as a tuple                |
-| `args_type` | The type of all arguments of the mock function as a tuple    |
-| `return_type` | The return type of the mock function                         |
+| Argument        | Description                                                  |
+|:----------------|:-------------------------------------------------------------|
+| `argK_type`     | The type of the K-th (0-based) argument of the mock function |
+| `args`          | All arguments of the mock function as a tuple                |
+| `args_type`     | The type of all arguments of the mock function as a tuple    |
+| `return_type`   | The return type of the mock function                         |
 | `function_type` | The type of the mock function                                |
 
 For example, when using an `ACTION` as a stub action for mock function:
-```
+```cpp
 int DoSomething(bool flag, int* ptr);
 ```
 we have:
+
 | **Pre-defined Symbol** | **Is Bound To** |
 |:-----------------------|:----------------|
 | `arg0`                 | the value of `flag` |
@@ -115,16 +117,16 @@ we have:
 
 Sometimes you'll want to parameterize the action.   For that we propose
 another macro
-```
+```cpp
 ACTION_P(name, param) { statements; }
 ```
 
 For example,
-```
+```cpp
 ACTION_P(Add, n) { return arg0 + n; }
 ```
 will allow you to write
-```
+```cpp
 // Returns argument #0 + 5.
 ... WillOnce(Add(5));
 ```
@@ -140,7 +142,7 @@ parameter as inferred by the compiler.
 
 We will also provide `ACTION_P2`, `ACTION_P3`, and etc to support
 multi-parameter actions.  For example,
-```
+```cpp
 ACTION_P2(ReturnDistanceTo, x, y) {
   double dx = arg0 - x;
   double dy = arg1 - y;
@@ -148,7 +150,7 @@ ACTION_P2(ReturnDistanceTo, x, y) {
 }
 ```
 lets you write
-```
+```cpp
 ... WillOnce(ReturnDistanceTo(5.0, 26.5));
 ```
 
@@ -160,7 +162,7 @@ number of parameters is 0.
 ### Overloading Actions ###
 
 You can easily define actions overloaded on the number of parameters:
-```
+```cpp
 ACTION_P(Plus, a) { ... }
 ACTION_P2(Plus, a, b) { ... }
 ```
@@ -173,7 +175,7 @@ parameters.  Instead, we let the compiler infer the types for us.
 
 Sometimes, however, we may want to be more explicit about the types.
 There are several tricks to do that.  For example:
-```
+```cpp
 ACTION(Foo) {
   // Makes sure arg0 can be converted to int.
   int n = arg0;
@@ -196,12 +198,12 @@ Google Test (the name is chosen to match `static_assert` in C++0x).
 If you are writing a function that returns an `ACTION` object, you'll
 need to know its type.  The type depends on the macro used to define
 the action and the parameter types.  The rule is relatively simple:
-| **Given Definition** | **Expression** | **Has Type** |
-|:---------------------|:---------------|:-------------|
-| `ACTION(Foo)`        | `Foo()`        | `FooAction`  |
-| `ACTION_P(Bar, param)` | `Bar(int_value)` | `BarActionP<int>` |
+| **Given Definition**     | **Expression**               | **Has Type**             |
+|:-------------------------|:-----------------------------|:-------------------------|
+| `ACTION(Foo)`            | `Foo()`                      | `FooAction`              |
+| `ACTION_P(Bar, param)`   | `Bar(int_value)`             | `BarActionP<int>`        |
 | `ACTION_P2(Baz, p1, p2)` | `Baz(bool_value, int_value)` | `BazActionP2<bool, int>` |
-| ...                  | ...            | ...          |
+| ...                      | ...                          | ...                      |
 
 Note that we have to pick different suffixes (`Action`, `ActionP`,
 `ActionP2`, and etc) for actions with different numbers of parameters,
@@ -262,14 +264,14 @@ available, we may want to support using lambdas as actions.
 Once the macros for defining actions are implemented, we plan to do
 the same for matchers:
 
-```
+```cpp
 MATCHER(name) { statements; }
 ```
 
 where you can refer to the value being matched as `arg`.  For example,
 given:
 
-```
+```cpp
 MATCHER(IsPositive) { return arg > 0; }
 ```
 
@@ -277,4 +279,4 @@ you can use `IsPositive()` as a matcher that matches a value iff it is
 greater than 0.
 
 We will also add `MATCHER_P`, `MATCHER_P2`, and etc for parameterized
-matchers.
\ No newline at end of file
+matchers.
diff --git a/googlemock/docs/ForDummies.md b/googlemock/docs/ForDummies.md
index 566a34e..418461d 100644
--- a/googlemock/docs/ForDummies.md
+++ b/googlemock/docs/ForDummies.md
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ Using Google Mock is easy! Inside your C++ source file, just `#include` `"gtest/
 # A Case for Mock Turtles #
 Let's look at an example. Suppose you are developing a graphics program that relies on a LOGO-like API for drawing. How would you test that it does the right thing? Well, you can run it and compare the screen with a golden screen snapshot, but let's admit it: tests like this are expensive to run and fragile (What if you just upgraded to a shiny new graphics card that has better anti-aliasing? Suddenly you have to update all your golden images.). It would be too painful if all your tests are like this. Fortunately, you learned about Dependency Injection and know the right thing to do: instead of having your application talk to the drawing API directly, wrap the API in an interface (say, `Turtle`) and code to that interface:
 
-```
+```cpp
 class Turtle {
   ...
   virtual ~Turtle() {}
@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ Using the `Turtle` interface as example, here are the simple steps you need to f
 
 After the process, you should have something like:
 
-```
+```cpp
 #include "gmock/gmock.h"  // Brings in Google Mock.
 class MockTurtle : public Turtle {
  public:
@@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ Once you have a mock class, using it is easy. The typical work flow is:
 
 Here's an example:
 
-```
+```cpp
 #include "path/to/mock-turtle.h"
 #include "gmock/gmock.h"
 #include "gtest/gtest.h"
@@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ Admittedly, this test is contrived and doesn't do much. You can easily achieve t
 ## Using Google Mock with Any Testing Framework ##
 If you want to use something other than Google Test (e.g. [CppUnit](http://sourceforge.net/projects/cppunit/) or
 [CxxTest](https://cxxtest.com/)) as your testing framework, just change the `main()` function in the previous section to:
-```
+```cpp
 int main(int argc, char** argv) {
   // The following line causes Google Mock to throw an exception on failure,
   // which will be interpreted by your testing framework as a test failure.
@@ -203,7 +203,7 @@ The key to using a mock object successfully is to set the _right expectations_ o
 ## General Syntax ##
 In Google Mock we use the `EXPECT_CALL()` macro to set an expectation on a mock method. The general syntax is:
 
-```
+```cpp
 EXPECT_CALL(mock_object, method(matchers))
     .Times(cardinality)
     .WillOnce(action)
@@ -216,7 +216,7 @@ The macro can be followed by some optional _clauses_ that provide more informati
 
 This syntax is designed to make an expectation read like English. For example, you can probably guess that
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::Return;
 ...
 EXPECT_CALL(turtle, GetX())
@@ -233,14 +233,14 @@ says that the `turtle` object's `GetX()` method will be called five times, it wi
 ## Matchers: What Arguments Do We Expect? ##
 When a mock function takes arguments, we must specify what arguments we are expecting; for example:
 
-```
+```cpp
 // Expects the turtle to move forward by 100 units.
 EXPECT_CALL(turtle, Forward(100));
 ```
 
 Sometimes you may not want to be too specific (Remember that talk about tests being too rigid? Over specification leads to brittle tests and obscures the intent of tests. Therefore we encourage you to specify only what's necessary - no more, no less.). If you care to check that `Forward()` will be called but aren't interested in its actual argument, write `_` as the argument, which means "anything goes":
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 ...
 // Expects the turtle to move forward.
@@ -251,7 +251,7 @@ EXPECT_CALL(turtle, Forward(_));
 
 A list of built-in matchers can be found in the [CheatSheet](CheatSheet.md). For example, here's the `Ge` (greater than or equal) matcher:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::Ge;
 ...
 EXPECT_CALL(turtle, Forward(Ge(100)));
@@ -281,7 +281,7 @@ First, if the return type of a mock function is a built-in type or a pointer, th
 
 Second, if a mock function doesn't have a default action, or the default action doesn't suit you, you can specify the action to be taken each time the expectation matches using a series of `WillOnce()` clauses followed by an optional `WillRepeatedly()`. For example,
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::Return;
 ...
 EXPECT_CALL(turtle, GetX())
@@ -292,7 +292,7 @@ EXPECT_CALL(turtle, GetX())
 
 This says that `turtle.GetX()` will be called _exactly three times_ (Google Mock inferred this from how many `WillOnce()` clauses we've written, since we didn't explicitly write `Times()`), and will return 100, 200, and 300 respectively.
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::Return;
 ...
 EXPECT_CALL(turtle, GetY())
@@ -309,7 +309,7 @@ What can we do inside `WillOnce()` besides `Return()`? You can return a referenc
 
 **Important note:** The `EXPECT_CALL()` statement evaluates the action clause only once, even though the action may be performed many times. Therefore you must be careful about side effects. The following may not do what you want:
 
-```
+```cpp
 int n = 100;
 EXPECT_CALL(turtle, GetX())
 .Times(4)
@@ -320,7 +320,7 @@ Instead of returning 100, 101, 102, ..., consecutively, this mock function will
 
 Time for another quiz! What do you think the following means?
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::Return;
 ...
 EXPECT_CALL(turtle, GetY())
@@ -335,7 +335,7 @@ So far we've only shown examples where you have a single expectation. More reali
 
 By default, when a mock method is invoked, Google Mock will search the expectations in the **reverse order** they are defined, and stop when an active expectation that matches the arguments is found (you can think of it as "newer rules override older ones."). If the matching expectation cannot take any more calls, you will get an upper-bound-violated failure. Here's an example:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 ...
 EXPECT_CALL(turtle, Forward(_));  // #1
@@ -352,7 +352,7 @@ By default, an expectation can match a call even though an earlier expectation h
 
 Sometimes, you may want all the expected calls to occur in a strict order. To say this in Google Mock is easy:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::InSequence;
 ...
 TEST(FooTest, DrawsLineSegment) {
@@ -379,7 +379,7 @@ Now let's do a quick quiz to see how well you can use this mock stuff already. H
 
 After you've come up with your answer, take a look at ours and compare notes (solve it yourself first - don't cheat!):
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::_;
 ...
 EXPECT_CALL(turtle, GoTo(_, _))  // #1
@@ -394,7 +394,7 @@ This example shows that **expectations in Google Mock are "sticky" by default**,
 
 Simple? Let's see if you've really understood it: what does the following code say?
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::Return;
 ...
 for (int i = n; i > 0; i--) {
@@ -407,7 +407,7 @@ If you think it says that `turtle.GetX()` will be called `n` times and will retu
 
 One correct way of saying that `turtle.GetX()` will return 10, 20, 30, ..., is to explicitly say that the expectations are _not_ sticky. In other words, they should _retire_ as soon as they are saturated:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::Return;
 ...
 for (int i = n; i > 0; i--) {
@@ -419,7 +419,7 @@ for (int i = n; i > 0; i--) {
 
 And, there's a better way to do it: in this case, we expect the calls to occur in a specific order, and we line up the actions to match the order. Since the order is important here, we should make it explicit using a sequence:
 
-```
+```cpp
 using ::testing::InSequence;
 using ::testing::Return;
 ...
diff --git a/googlemock/docs/FrequentlyAskedQuestions.md b/googlemock/docs/FrequentlyAskedQuestions.md
index 9008c63..c7fa47f 100644
--- a/googlemock/docs/FrequentlyAskedQuestions.md
+++ b/googlemock/docs/FrequentlyAskedQuestions.md
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ later.  Fortunately, it's usually not hard to migrate an existing
 matcher to the new API.  Here's what you need to do:
 
 If you wrote your matcher like this:
-```
+```cpp
 // Old matcher definition that doesn't work with the latest
 // Google Mock.
 using ::testing::MatcherInterface;
@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ class MyWonderfulMatcher : public MatcherInterface<MyType> {
 ```
 
 you'll need to change it to:
-```
+```cpp
 // New matcher definition that works with the latest Google Mock.
 using ::testing::MatcherInterface;
 using ::testing::MatchResultListener;
@@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ argument of type `MatchResultListener*`.)
 
 If you were also using `ExplainMatchResultTo()` to improve the matcher
 message:
-```
+```cpp
 // Old matcher definition that doesn't work with the lastest
 // Google Mock.
 using ::testing::MatcherInterface;
@@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ class MyWonderfulMatcher : public MatcherInterface<MyType> {
 you should move the logic of `ExplainMatchResultTo()` into
 `MatchAndExplain()`, using the `MatchResultListener` argument where
 the `::std::ostream` was used:
-```
+```cpp
 // New matcher definition that works with the latest Google Mock.
 using ::testing::MatcherInterface;
 using ::testing::MatchResultListener;
@@ -110,7 +110,7 @@ class MyWonderfulMatcher : public MatcherInterface<MyType> {
 ```
 
 If your matcher is defined using `MakePolymorphicMatcher()`:
-```
+```cpp
 // Old matcher definition that doesn't work with the latest
 // Google Mock.
 using ::testing::MakePolymorphicMatcher;
@@ -130,7 +130,7 @@ class MyGreatMatcher {
 you should rename the `Matches()` method to `MatchAndExplain()` and
 add a `MatchResultListener*` argument (the same as what you need to do
 for matchers defined by implementing `MatcherInterface`):
-```
+```cpp
 // New matcher definition that works with the latest Google Mock.
 using ::testing::MakePolymorphicMatcher;
 using ::testing::MatchResultListener;
@@ -150,7 +150,7 @@ class MyGreatMatcher {
 
 If your polymorphic matcher uses `ExplainMatchResultTo()` for better
 failure messages:
-```
+```cpp
 // Old matcher definition that doesn't work with the latest
 // Google Mock.
 using ::testing::MakePolymorphicMatcher;
@@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ void ExplainMatchResultTo(const MyGreatMatcher& matcher,
 
 you'll need to move the logic inside `ExplainMatchResultTo()` to
 `MatchAndExplain()`:
-```
+```cpp
 // New matcher definition that works with the latest Google Mock.
 using ::testing::MakePolymorphicMatcher;
 using ::testing::MatchResultListener;
@@ -254,7 +254,7 @@ C++ as much as possible.
 ## MSVC gives me warning C4301 or C4373 when I define a mock method with a const parameter.  Why? ##
 
 If you compile this using Microsoft Visual C++ 2005 SP1:
-```
+```cpp
 class Foo {
   ...
   virtual void Bar(const int i) = 0;
@@ -279,7 +279,7 @@ warning C4373: 'MockFoo::Bar': virtual function overrides 'Foo::Bar', previous v
 In C++, if you _declare_ a function with a `const` parameter, the
 `const` modifier is _ignored_.  Therefore, the `Foo` base class above
 is equivalent to:
-```
+```cpp
 class Foo {
   ...
   virtual void Bar(int i) = 0;  // int or const int?  Makes no difference.
@@ -298,7 +298,7 @@ Note that we are talking about the _top-level_ `const` modifier here.
 If the function parameter is passed by pointer or reference, declaring
 the _pointee_ or _referee_ as `const` is still meaningful.  For
 example, the following two declarations are _not_ equivalent:
-```
+```cpp
 void Bar(int* p);        // Neither p nor *p is const.
 void Bar(const int* p);  // p is not const, but *p is.
 ```
@@ -318,7 +318,7 @@ you'll gain insights on why the expectations you set are not met.
 
 ## How can I assert that a function is NEVER called? ##
 
-```
+```cpp
 EXPECT_CALL(foo, Bar(_))
     .Times(0);
 ```
@@ -345,7 +345,7 @@ Whenever you derive from a base class, make sure its destructor is
 virtual.  Otherwise Bad Things will happen.  Consider the following
 code:
 
-```
+```cpp
 class Base {
  public:
   // Not virtual, but should be.
@@ -375,7 +375,7 @@ will be happy.
 
 When people complain about this, often they are referring to code like:
 
-```
+```cpp
 // foo.Bar() should be called twice, return 1 the first time, and return
 // 2 the second time.  However, I have to write the expectations in the
 // reverse order.  This sucks big time!!!
@@ -399,7 +399,7 @@ harder to do so.
 There are two better ways to write the test spec.  You could either
 put the expectations in sequence:
 
-```
+```cpp
 // foo.Bar() should be called twice, return 1 the first time, and return
 // 2 the second time.  Using a sequence, we can write the expectations
 // in their natural order.
@@ -416,7 +416,7 @@ put the expectations in sequence:
 
 or you can put the sequence of actions in the same expectation:
 
-```
+```cpp
 // foo.Bar() should be called twice, return 1 the first time, and return
 // 2 the second time.
 EXPECT_CALL(foo, Bar())
@@ -450,14 +450,14 @@ may creep in unnoticed.
 
 If, however, you are sure that the calls are OK, you can write
 
-```
+```cpp
 EXPECT_CALL(foo, Bar(_))
     .WillRepeatedly(...);
 ```
 
 instead of
 
-```
+```cpp
 ON_CALL(foo, Bar(_))
     .WillByDefault(...);
 ```
@@ -488,12 +488,12 @@ extent, Google Mock's syntax was chosen for several practical advantages it
 has.
 
 Try to mock a function that takes a map as an argument:
-```
+```cpp
 virtual int GetSize(const map<int, std::string>& m);
 ```
 
 Using the proposed syntax, it would be:
-```
+```cpp
 MOCK_METHOD1(GetSize, int, const map<int, std::string>& m);
 ```
 
@@ -503,7 +503,7 @@ around this you can use `typedef` to give the map type a name, but
 that gets in the way of your work.  Google Mock's syntax avoids this
 problem as the function's argument types are protected inside a pair
 of parentheses:
-```
+```cpp
 // This compiles fine.
 MOCK_METHOD1(GetSize, int(const map<int, std::string>& m));
 ```