Michel Fortin wrote:
Le 2008-05-12 à 18:14, John MacFarlane a écrit :
The PEG representation is concise, precise, and readable.
Readable, hum... if I look at this rule from PEG Markdown:
ListContinuationBlock = a:StartList
( BlankLines
{ if (strlen($$.contents.str) == 0)
$$.contents.str = strdup("\001"); /* block separator */
pushelt($$, &a); } )
( Indent ListBlock { pushelt($$, &a); } )+
{ $$ = mk_str(concat_string_list(reverse(a.children))); }
it looks a lot like code to me, half of it I don't understand. If we're
going this way, there's going to be a learning curve: for me, and for
everyone trying to understand the syntax. I'd prefer to avoid forcing
people to learn a new language only to understand the specification.
Yeah, that's worse.
Mainly I just would suggest taking all those numbered lists of things,
and putting them on a single line. It's not that it has to be BNF or
EBNF/ABNF/whatever, but parts which *can* be expressed in such a way,
and can be condensed to fit in a more compact space, should be. The
current numbered lists + English approach, in many parts of your current
work, just add visual clutter. :)
-Jacob
_______________________________________________
Markdown-Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
