diff --git a/docs/LibASTMatchersTutorial.rst b/docs/LibASTMatchersTutorial.rst
index 381c558..6ebb499 100644
--- a/docs/LibASTMatchersTutorial.rst
+++ b/docs/LibASTMatchersTutorial.rst
@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
 further information, see the `getting started
 guide <http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html>`_.
 
-::
+.. code-block:: console
 
       mkdir ~/clang-llvm && cd ~/clang-llvm
       git clone http://llvm.org/git/llvm.git
@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@
 may already have CMake installed, but current binary versions of CMake
 aren't built with Ninja support.
 
-::
+.. code-block:: console
 
       cd ~/clang-llvm
       git clone https://github.com/martine/ninja.git
@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@
 
 Okay. Now we'll build Clang!
 
-::
+.. code-block:: console
 
       cd ~/clang-llvm
       mkdir build && cd build
@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@
 
 Finally, we want to set Clang as its own compiler.
 
-::
+.. code-block:: console
 
       cd ~/clang-llvm/build
       ccmake ../llvm
@@ -94,7 +94,7 @@
 that it exists. As this is not going to be a core clang tool, it will
 live in the ``tools/extra`` repository.
 
-::
+.. code-block:: console
 
       cd ~/clang-llvm/llvm/tools/clang
       mkdir tools/extra/loop-convert
@@ -123,7 +123,7 @@
 why the different parts are needed can be found in the `LibTooling
 documentation <LibTooling.html>`_.
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       // Declares clang::SyntaxOnlyAction.
       #include "clang/Frontend/FrontendActions.h"
@@ -153,7 +153,7 @@
 And that's it! You can compile our new tool by running ninja from the
 ``build`` directory.
 
-::
+.. code-block:: console
 
       cd ~/clang-llvm/build
       ninja
@@ -161,7 +161,7 @@
 You should now be able to run the syntax checker, which is located in
 ``~/clang-llvm/build/bin``, on any source file. Try it!
 
-::
+.. code-block:: console
 
       cat "void main() {}" > test.cpp
       bin/loop-convert test.cpp --
@@ -186,7 +186,7 @@
 is a matcher to do exactly that, conveniently named ``binaryOperator``.
 I'll give you one guess what this matcher does:
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       binaryOperator(hasOperatorName("+"), hasLHS(integerLiteral(equals(0))))
 
@@ -207,7 +207,7 @@
 bound, so that they can be referred to whenever a match is found. To do
 so, simply call the method ``bind`` on these matchers, e.g.:
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       variable(hasType(isInteger())).bind("intvar")
 
@@ -218,21 +218,21 @@
 which will capture all ``for`` statements that define a new variable
 initialized to zero. Let's start with matching all ``for`` loops:
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       forStmt()
 
 Next, we want to specify that a single variable is declared in the first
 portion of the loop, so we can extend the matcher to
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       forStmt(hasLoopInit(declStmt(hasSingleDecl(varDecl()))))
 
 Finally, we can add the condition that the variable is initialized to
 zero.
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       forStmt(hasLoopInit(declStmt(hasSingleDecl(varDecl(
         hasInitializer(integerLiteral(equals(0))))))))
@@ -247,7 +247,7 @@
 The last step is giving the matcher a name and binding the ``ForStmt``
 as we will want to do something with it:
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       StatementMatcher LoopMatcher =
         forStmt(hasLoopInit(declStmt(hasSingleDecl(varDecl(
@@ -260,7 +260,8 @@
 
 Add the following to ``LoopConvert.cpp``:
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
+
       #include "clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchers.h"
       #include "clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchFinder.h"
 
@@ -280,7 +281,7 @@
 
 And change ``main()`` to:
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       int main(int argc, const char **argv) {
         CommonOptionsParser OptionsParser(argc, argv);
@@ -298,7 +299,7 @@
 loops. Create a new file with a few examples, and test out our new
 handiwork:
 
-::
+.. code-block:: console
 
       cd ~/clang-llvm/llvm/llvm_build/
       ninja loop-convert
@@ -336,7 +337,7 @@
 In any case, we can start building this sub-matcher. We can require that
 the increment step be a unary increment like this:
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       hasIncrement(unaryOperator(hasOperatorName("++")))
 
@@ -346,7 +347,7 @@
 variable declarations. To find a ``unaryOperator`` that refers to a
 specific declaration, we can simply add a second condition to it:
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       hasIncrement(unaryOperator(
         hasOperatorName("++"),
@@ -355,7 +356,7 @@
 Furthermore, we can restrict our matcher to only match if the
 incremented variable is an integer:
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       hasIncrement(unaryOperator(
         hasOperatorName("++"),
@@ -364,7 +365,7 @@
 And the last step will be to attach an identifier to this variable, so
 that we can retrieve it in the callback:
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       hasIncrement(unaryOperator(
         hasOperatorName("++"),
@@ -383,14 +384,14 @@
 approximating the result we want with matchers, filling in the details
 in the callback. So we start with:
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       hasCondition(binaryOperator(hasOperatorName("<"))
 
 It makes sense to ensure that the left-hand side is a reference to a
 variable, and that the right-hand side has integer type.
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       hasCondition(binaryOperator(
         hasOperatorName("<"),
@@ -427,7 +428,7 @@
 ignore implicit casts and parentheses before continuing to match.
 Adjusting the condition operator will restore the desired match.
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       hasCondition(binaryOperator(
         hasOperatorName("<"),
@@ -461,7 +462,7 @@
 
 In ``LoopActions.cpp``:
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       #include "clang/AST/ASTContext.h"
 
@@ -479,7 +480,7 @@
 declarations, let's make sure that they're all the same, using a helper
 function I call ``areSameVariable()``.
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       if (!areSameVariable(IncVar, CondVar) || !areSameVariable(IncVar, InitVar))
         return;
@@ -489,7 +490,7 @@
 If execution reaches the end of ``LoopPrinter::run()``, we know that the
 loop shell that looks like
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       for (int i= 0; i < expr(); ++i) { ... }
 
@@ -503,7 +504,7 @@
 address, all we need to do is make sure neither ``ValueDecl`` (base
 class of ``VarDecl``) is ``NULL`` and compare the canonical Decls.
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
       static bool areSameVariable(const ValueDecl *First, const ValueDecl *Second) {
         return First && Second &&
@@ -514,9 +515,9 @@
 Clang has already done the hard work for us by providing a way to
 canonicalize expressions:
 
-::
+.. code-block:: c++
 
-      static bool areSameExpr(ASTContext* Context, const Expr *First,
+      static bool areSameExpr(ASTContext *Context, const Expr *First,
                               const Expr *Second) {
         if (!First || !Second)
           return false;