search

atsushieno / vscode-language-review

Re:VIEW language Support for Visual Studio Code. / issue/PRは日本語でも対応できます
Other
43 stars 8 forks source link

Block instructions for enclosed articles do not work and are displayed as non-compliant. #22

Closed TakamiChie closed 4 years ago

TakamiChie commented 5 years ago

steps

  1. Make the following description in the. *.re file. 
    //note[test] {
test
//}
  2. Show live preview from the "Show preview" button.

problem

In step 1, the line that wrote the note is highlighted as an error line, and you receive the following message:

note というブロック構文はサポートされていません。

Also, you do not see a live preview in step 2.

However, note notation is supported in Re:view, the following command is not an error, HTML is output.

> review compile--target html ch-01.re

expected behavior

"//note"The command is not an error and the live preview is displayed.

check around

The following command also displayed the row as an error and did not show a live preview.

Also, if you omit the caption, it was an error.

reference specifications

Re:VIEW Format Guide>Short column https://github.com/kmuto/review/blob/master/doc/format.md#short-column

version

atsushieno commented 5 years ago

Thanks for the report. Unfortunately it is an upstream issue at https://github.com/vvakame/review.js which does the actual content validation, namely at: https://github.com/vvakame/review.js/blob/4cfcc64b7ccfd6445059631b0439b26542f0e449/lib/parser/validator.ts#L91

Reports would be welcomed upstream, but I have to say, review.js is quite old and not actively maintained. Yet it is an essential dependency that this entire VSCode extension cannot live without (not depending on it means an entire rewrite of the parser, which is not easily doable).

If you need up-to-date syntax support, https://github.com/erukiti/ya-language-review would work.

TakamiChie commented 5 years ago

Thank you for the answer. The contents were reported to the review.js repository.

atsushieno commented 4 years ago

It is fixed upstream, and now we have rebased review.js to 0.16.0 which I believe contains the fix. Thanks again for the report.