On 1/18/20 8:10 AM, James Tomasino wrote:
> From: solderpunk <solderpunk at SDF.ORG>
>
>> Yes, this means no nested lists. It may seem like I've gone nuts and
>> suddenly happily let a whole bunch of complicated stuff into the spec,
>> but I really haven't! This is still supposed to be a very simple
>> syntax, which inevitably comes with limitations. There is no nested
>> anything in the whole syntax.
>
>
> Love the + thing. If you think of lists and sublists hierarchically
rather than nested then we do have a parallel, the # headers!
>
> Ordered list:
> + List item one
> + List item 2
> ++ Level 2 item 1
> ++ Level 2 item 2
>
> Unordered list:
> * List 1
> ** Deeper
> *** Maximum deepitude
>
> And it maintains the whole "read the first 3 characters to determine
what this is" rule. No extra tabbing or spacing to get in the way and
follows similar conventions to the headings.
Hello! I've been lurking throughout the entire long history of this
discussion. ("Wanted to contribute, but other commitments...etc. etc.")
I just wanted to pipe in to share my excitement about this simple 3-char
rule. I *love* the simplicity of "context-free" line-based parsing.
This reminds me of several times in which I've used an "indent level +
sort order" in databases to simulate complex nested tree hierarchies to
make rendering to the screen absolutely trivial.
For some reason, it had never occurred to me that counting the number of
stars '*' at the beginning of the line logically amounted to the same
thing. This is wonderful.
I'm also strongly in favor of the Maximum Deepitude rule.
<3
-ratfactor
---
Previous in thread (110 of 148): 🗣️ solderpunk (solderpunk (a) SDF.ORG)
Next in thread (112 of 148): 🗣️ Julien Blanchard (julien (a) typed-hole.org)