search

davidfstr / rdiscount

Discount (For Ruby) Implementation of John Gruber's Markdown
http://dafoster.net/projects/rdiscount/
Other
753 stars 70 forks source link

Allow stricter handling of consecutive bullet lists with MKD_EXPLICITLIST flag #137

Closed DannyBen closed 1 year ago

DannyBen commented 8 years ago

Code:

require 'rdiscount'

markdown = <<EOF
- Bullet
- Bullet

1. Numbered
2. Numbered
EOF

puts RDiscount.new(markdown).to_html

Output:

<ul>
  <li>Bullet</li>
  <li><p>Bullet</p></li>
  <li><p>Numbered</p></li>
  <li>Numbered</li>
</ul>

Expected Output:

<ul>
  <li>Bullet</li>
  <li>Bullet</li>
</ul>
<ol>
  <li>Numbered</li>
  <li>Numbered</li>
</ol>

If anything is inserted between the lists (like ----), the result is fine.

davidfstr commented 8 years ago

Confirmed with underlying Discount 2.2.0.

Reported upstream at: https://github.com/Orc/discount/issues/150

jesperronn commented 7 years ago

The upstream is closed with comment https://github.com/Orc/discount/issues/150#issuecomment-225477646

Sadly, this is not a defect; it's the way markdown processes lists :-(

I'm working on yet another effing option flag to process lists in the expected nonsurprising manner, but it has to be an option because the reference implementation merges adjacent lists no matter what type they are.

Should this also be closed?

davidfstr commented 7 years ago

It seems now that it is possible to get the expected output mentioned above via the new MKD_EXPLICITLIST flag that Discount just added for v2.2.3b6 . However RDiscount doesn't support this flag yet. I'll plan to wait until Discount 2.2.3(final) is released before supporting that option.

davidfstr commented 3 years ago

Discount 2.2.3 final has been released, so this issue is now unblocked.

DannyBen commented 3 years ago

This is an old issue, and I have since moved on - but I am not sure why is this considered "not a defect" as mentioned in the linked comment. This is purely a bug. It does not need flags to be "stricter", it needs to be fixed... nobody needs the broken behavior. A new line in markdown marks the end of a block, as is the case in all other markdown implementations I have seen.

davidfstr commented 3 years ago

FWIW, I'm classifying it as a feature because it is something that will need to be requested explicitly via flag.

it needs to be fixed... nobody needs the broken behavior.

I am certain there are folks depending on the old behavior. I'm not planning on breaking the world without a good reason.