Re: [dev] smu CommomMark improvements

From: Karl Bartel <>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 08:42:08 +0200

Hi Ciprian,

Since I only wrote some recent commits and never spoke to the original
author, my knowledge is only some guesswork from reading the code. So
my answers are not as precise as I'd like them to be.

> * is the proposed markup compliant with CommonMark as implemented by
> ?

smu only takes a subset of CommonMark, but if you use that, the output
is intended to be the same. However, I didn't test it, so it's
probably not not really the case.

> (i.e. if so, which is the syntax that is common in both generators,
> `smu` and `cmark`?)

Everything in the readme as well as in the tests directory should give
the same result with smu and other commonmark compatible parsers. If
it doesn't, feel free to create an issue.

> * are code-blocks as separated by ```` on each line supported? (the
> issue with codeblocks as indented by spaces is that one can't easily
> copy-paste those in the shell or plain-text editor without removing
> the indentation;)

I just pushed basic support for this. It works if you use exactly
three backticks and don't use language info strings. So
your code here
should be fine.

> * reading the readme as rendered by GitHub, it is misleading,
> especially regarding the quoting syntax; perhaps it would be better
> to put it as an plain `.txt` file which is much more readable;

Thanks for the heads up! I'll have a look at the problem. Ideally, the
output would be identical for both smu and github. If I can't get them
to behave the same, I'll rename to just README.

Thanks for the feedback,
Received on Thu Oct 10 2019 - 08:42:08 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Oct 10 2019 - 09:00:09 CEST