bobtfish at bobtfish.net
Mon Mar 3 16:11:13 EST 2008
On 29 Feb 2008, at 19:29, Yuri Takhteyev wrote:
>> Text::Markdown *does not* extend the original Markdown syntax *in
> Well, I don't know if agree with this reading.
Good! My original comments were somewhat deliberately inflamatory to
try and provoke discussion - which seems to have been a success! :)
> Text:Markdown just imports Text:MultiMarkdown and disables some
> features. While it might behave like the original markdown, it goes a
> long way in terms of blurring the boundary between Markdown and
> MultiMarkdown. And using it as a reference implementation would mean
> sending maintainers of other implementations hunting through
> MultiMarkdown code trying to figure out what features are "standard"
> and what features are "extra".
As noted in my original mail, I didn't in any way suggest that I
considered my code's time had come.
As yes - currently that way that this is implemented leaves *a lot*
to be desired.
Re-reading my original email - I didn't term this strongly enough:
> On 28 Feb 2008, at 17:34, Tomas Doran wrote:
>> I'd like to get to a point where I'm a little more happy with the
>> code, and then I'll start promoting this as a 'true' fork, or, if
>> I can get John to agree and approve - I'd like to become the
>> 'official' maintained version which is linked from daringfireball.
When I said 'a little more happy with the code', I meant 'un-fuck the
whole mess internally' ;_)
However, from an *external* perspective, I believe that my code is
very useable, and has solved more nasty / edge cases than either
Markdown.pl or MultiMarkdown.pl.
I wasn't, however - prepared to spend my effort maintaining 2
different implementations by copy-pasting code between them, that
just sucks :)
More information about the Markdown-Discuss