> I noticed it because the code samples weren't syntax highlighted but > there are some other quirks with lists/headers. Rust's documentation > doesn't stick to the very small part of the language that's common > across most implementations. It would mean no nested lists, tables, > code snippets, definition lists, formulas, etc. > > http://johnmacfarlane.net/pandoc/demo/example9/pandocs-markdown.html
OK, well the syntax highlighting is another problem, the lib I'm using seems to have an out of date rust syntax or something and it fails hard when trying to highlight blocks so I temporarily disabled it. nested lists and tables are supported, code blocks too. definition lists can be inlined in html in the docs if really needed, formulas I have no idea. The bottom line is most things are possible too with GFM and it is my opinion that it's more common/well-known than pandoc given that pretty much everyone these days uses github at some point or another. So I would say if that's ok we switch whatever few things don't work from the pandoc syntax over to GFM syntax. Is this acceptable? I don't mind helping with it, but it would help if people report any incompatibilities then. Cheers _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
