You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Apr 13, 2021. It is now read-only.
When a fenced code block is indented (as required if it's inside an enumeration), tut processes the code block, but doesn't replace tut by scala. This is because checkBoundary allows for leading spaces:
To the extent that tut supports indented fences at all it's just accidental. Markdown's handling of leading space seems to depend on the depth of the opening ``` and whether or not it's inside an enumeration, and it also involves inferring a closing ``` if it encounters interior lines that have an indent of 1 space or less. But that's just from playing around, it could be more complicated than that.
How do you think this should be handled? I can hang onto the indentation and delete that number of leading spaces from any interior lines I find, but I don't think it's worth trying to re-implement whatever other nutty stuff MD is doing.
Well, wait. It's more complicated than that. I need to trim the lines before processing them and then re-ident everything as it comes back from the REPL.
I can hang onto the indentation and delete that number of leading spaces from any interior lines I find, but I don't think it's worth trying to re-implement whatever other nutty stuff MD is doing.
Sounds good to me.
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
When a fenced code block is indented (as required if it's inside an enumeration), tut processes the code block, but doesn't replace
tut
byscala
. This is becausecheckBoundary
allows for leading spaces:but
fixShed
gets confused:The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: