Closed JacksonKearl closed 3 years ago
not sure I understand the use case.....
It's a narrow use case, but I needed to build markdown strings using templates.
it does seem out of scope to me, but I could always add a setting that looks for this specific case. do you think others would find it useful?
I don't think there's much value to adding this as a specific case, but in general I'd expect it to still work if the string contains backtics and simply escape them.
I think most people don't want this to work if they're within backticks, such as #23 .
That's a different thing, what I'm taking about is
const a = 'this has some internal `backticks` and I'd like to insert a substitution ${'
to
const a = `this has some internal \`backticks\` and I'd like to insert a substitution ${}`
I think this is out of scope for now because the extension primarily focuses on the presence of quotes around the ${ as a precursor to any replacement. Thanks for the idea though.
This is a bit specific so feel free to
*out-of-scope
, but it'd be nice if this could turn:into