[Haddock] [haddock] #252: Allow markdown inside of emphasis

[haddock]

#252: Allow markdown inside of emphasis
------------------------+---------------------------------------------------
Reporter:  DanielDiaz   |        Owner:  Fūzetsu
    Type:  enhancement  |       Status:  new    
Priority:  minor        |    Milestone:         
 Version:  2.11.0       |   Resolution:         
Keywords:               |  
------------------------+---------------------------------------------------
Changes (by DanielDiaz):

 * cc: dhelta.diaz at gmail.com (added)


Comment:

 Replying to [comment:1 Fūzetsu]:
 > First case: that's right, you currently can not have anything but plain
 text inside of emphasis: the parser simply swallows up everything until a
 ‘/’. This is also the behaviour in the new parser I wrote simply because
 the first goal for it was to reproduce the old behaviour exactly. I have
 discussed this problem very briefly with Simon Hengel just over a week ago
 and the general opinion seems that it would be nice to be able to have
 markup inside of emphasis (note that I have currently implemented support
 for bold text (with 2 underscores) which also exhibits this rather nasty
 behaviour) and I would be all for it. It is certainly possible to do with
 the new parser and the implementation wouldn't be very difficult. The only
 obstacle is that I have no data on how much old documentation this would
 change and I'd like to have some numbers to back the change up. I do think
 that this is a nice change and that in the end, it will be put in.

 These are good news. About old documentation compatibility, probably there
 are some docs around using markdown inside of emphasis, knowing that the
 character will show up. Something in the lines of "/Take 'it'!/". If we
 apply the proposed changes, the output of those docs would change. This is
 all hypothetical, but given the number of packages, we surely have some
 cases like this. If something is feasible, it will be done.

 > For this very same reason, HTML codes aren't converted. It is certainly
 something that can be addressed. I will do some research into how much
 documentation would potentially change (to worse) but I suspect the answer
 will be that the benefit far outweighs any changes.
 >
 >
 > Regards multi-line emphasis: this is known, have a look at ticket #126
 from years ago where I ask whether there's actually interest with this.
 While the implementation is certainly possible (if not quite as simple as
 the previous one), I am more reluctant about implementing this. With the
 old parser, a single unescaped ‘/’ on a line would make the parsing fail.
 With the current parser, it gets treated as plain text. In light of this,
 do you believe that multi-line emphasis is more common than single ‘/’ on
 a line on its own? In the end, I just don't think that multi-line emphasis
 warrants the additional parsing complexity and syntax rules. I would
 appreciate it if you could reply to this part of the ticket on the ticket
 #126.
 >

 I wrote my response in the mentioned ticket.

 > I'm changing the summary to deal with allowing markdown inside of
 emphasis and the other part of the discussion can be carried on in #126.
 >
 >
 > Sorry for late reply, I had problem with e-mail that I was not aware of
 until today.

 Thank you! :)

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.haskell.org/haddock/ticket/252#comment:2>
haddock <http://www.haskell.org/haddock>
Haddock, The Haskell Documentation Tool