On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 03:34:30PM -0500, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:28:53PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > On the other hand, if this line must be spelled like the above to
> > please asciidoctor, i.e. the first and the last must not have
> > backslashes and the second must have backslashes, I'd have to say
> > we have a bigger problem. Perhaps asciidoctor needs to be fixed
> > until normal people like we can rely on it.
>
> Yeah, that is the "insane" part I mentioned. It _does_ make sense
> syntactically ("-1" cannot possibly be an attribute name, so it does not
> parse as one), but I do not like the degree to which writers must know
> all of the arcane syntax rules (and cannot rely on something simple like
> "{ is special, so I must escape it, and over-escaping is not a
> problem").
The underlying issue is that both AsciiDoc and Asciidoctor use regexps
to parse their data, which we all know is a bad idea. Asciidoctor does
less forward looking because it's much faster, so it's a bit less
flexible with overescaping.
There are plans for Asciidoctor to move to a defined grammar at some
point, which should hopefully make things a bit less insane.
--
brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US
+1 832 623 2791 | https://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only
OpenPGP: RSA v4 4096b: 88AC E9B2 9196 305B A994 7552 F1BA 225C 0223 B187
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature