Open gawhyte opened 9 years ago
I'm down with accepting this, but can you add a new test that tests this syntax?
btw - this PR fixes another issue - it would be great if it could be merged in and CPAN updated...
Here's some markdown that demonstrates the bug...
1. Line 1 1. Line 2 1. Line 3 with code block ``` line 1 line 2 ``` 1. Line 4 with code block ``` a line a line after a blank line ``` 1. Line 5
The bug renders the blocks as 'code' and fails to detect the block on line 4:
!
...with patch...
Mostly works, but it appears to be double-processing code inside the fences. I.e. # foo
--> <h1>foo</h1>
--> <h1>comment</h1>
.
Generates strange output given the following markdown:
```
# comment
```
Output:
<pre><code><h1>comment</h1>
</code></pre>
Expected:
<pre><code># comment
</code></pre>
https://help.github.com/articles/github-flavored-markdown/#fenced-code-blocks
I think this would be a handy feature, but I understand if you don't want to poison the implementation with Markdown dialects.
I modified sub _DoCodeBlocks to do two passes. First it tries to find any fenced code blocks using code adapted from sub _DoCodeSpans, hashes them, then proceeds to perform the traditional codeblock check. I did not write any new tests, but it continues to pass existing ones.