Ihor Radchenko <yanta...@posteo.net> writes: > FYI, my approach to solve this problem is different - I want > (eventually) to allow some kind of alternative syntax for tables that > will allow bypassing similar situations. For example, we can allow > multiple || to serve as delimiters: > > | this | is | a | normal | table | row | > || here || we || allow || verbatim "|" || inside || ||
Your idea is not that different from what I proposed, except that it is a less general, in that you special-case one particular problem with tables. Or, would the "doubling escapes" work for all markup? Still, that would not solve other table-related problems, such as | =foo= and =bar= |, where the problem is = and not |, right? As for "parser bugs", I find it hard to believe that we could not come up with some unambiguous sequence of characters, even if ugly, to instruct the parser about precedence. Rudy -- "It is no paradox to say that in our most theoretical moods we may be nearest to our most practical applications." --- Alfred North Whitehead, 1861-1947 Rudolf Adamkovič <rud...@adamkovic.org> [he/him] http://adamkovic.org
