Smalltalk › Pharo › Pharo Smalltalk Developers

PetitMarkdown

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

32 messages Options

NorbertHartl

PetitMarkdown

I found markdown parsers in smalltalkhub and in the configuration browser.

http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~PharoExtras/PetitMarkdown/

and the one in the configuration browser

PPMarkdown

If I understand it correctly both are rooted into work Camillo did. The one in PharoExtras looks newer to me. So I assume the best would be to copy the ConfigurationOfPetitMarkdown from PharoExtras to MetacelloRepo and remove the ConfigurationOfPPMarkdown. Right? Or are there any objections?

Norbert

Hannes Hirzel

Re: PetitMarkdown

Are there any news on this?

--Hannes

On 12/28/14, Norbert Hartl <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I found markdown parsers in smalltalkhub and in the configuration browser.
>
> http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~PharoExtras/PetitMarkdown/
> <http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~PharoExtras/PetitMarkdown/>
>
> and the one in the configuration browser
>
> PPMarkdown
>
> If I understand it correctly both are rooted into work Camillo did. The one
> in PharoExtras looks newer to me. So I assume the best would be to copy the
> ConfigurationOfPetitMarkdown from PharoExtras to MetacelloRepo and remove
> the ConfigurationOfPPMarkdown. Right? Or are there any objections?
>
> Norbert

kurs.jan

Re: PetitMarkdown

Hey,

I also created an indentation sensitive extension of PetitParser, I also included some examples including Markdown. If you load PetitParser, you get the Markdown example as well.

There is a short introduction to the indentation:

http://scg.unibe.ch/research/indentParsing

Cheers Jan

On Apr 13, 2015 5:24 PM, "H. Hirzel" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Are there any news on this?

--Hannes

On 12/28/14, Norbert Hartl <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I found markdown parsers in smalltalkhub and in the configuration browser.
>
> http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~PharoExtras/PetitMarkdown/
> <http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~PharoExtras/PetitMarkdown/>
>
> and the one in the configuration browser
>
> PPMarkdown
>
> If I understand it correctly both are rooted into work Camillo did. The one
> in PharoExtras looks newer to me. So I assume the best would be to copy the
> ConfigurationOfPetitMarkdown from PharoExtras to MetacelloRepo and remove
> the ConfigurationOfPPMarkdown. Right? Or are there any objections?
>
> Norbert

EstebanLM

Re: PetitMarkdown

how complete it is?

we would really like to think on:

1) include petitparser in Pharo

2) allow the writing of class docs in MD format :)

of course, we are talking about the not-so-near future, but is an idea we are thinking about… :P

and in any case, I would like to use a good MD parser for my own stuff :)

Esteban

On 14 Apr 2015, at 10:42, Jan Kurš <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hey,
I also created an indentation sensitive extension of PetitParser, I also included some examples including Markdown. If you load PetitParser, you get the Markdown example as well.
There is a short introduction to the indentation:
http://scg.unibe.ch/research/indentParsing
Cheers Jan

On Apr 13, 2015 5:24 PM, "H. Hirzel" <[hidden email]> wrote:
Are there any news on this?

--Hannes

On 12/28/14, Norbert Hartl <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I found markdown parsers in smalltalkhub and in the configuration browser.
>
> http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~PharoExtras/PetitMarkdown/
> <http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~PharoExtras/PetitMarkdown/>
>
> and the one in the configuration browser
>
> PPMarkdown
>
> If I understand it correctly both are rooted into work Camillo did. The one
> in PharoExtras looks newer to me. So I assume the best would be to copy the
> ConfigurationOfPetitMarkdown from PharoExtras to MetacelloRepo and remove
> the ConfigurationOfPPMarkdown. Right? Or are there any objections?
>
> Norbert

Damien Pollet

Re: PetitMarkdown

PetitMarkdown (at least in the state I left it) had an incomplete and contorted grammar, translated from another implementation (the one used by pandoc, I think). I started something to handle indentation, but meh. Jan's extension of PetitParser is the way to go, and it should make the grammar way more readable.

On 14 April 2015 at 11:43, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote:

how complete it is?
we would really like to think on:

1) include petitparser in Pharo
2) allow the writing of class docs in MD format :)

of course, we are talking about the not-so-near future, but is an idea we are thinking about… :P

and in any case, I would like to use a good MD parser for my own stuff :)

Esteban

On 14 Apr 2015, at 10:42, Jan Kurš <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hey,
I also created an indentation sensitive extension of PetitParser, I also included some examples including Markdown. If you load PetitParser, you get the Markdown example as well.
There is a short introduction to the indentation:
http://scg.unibe.ch/research/indentParsing
Cheers Jan

On Apr 13, 2015 5:24 PM, "H. Hirzel" <[hidden email]> wrote:
Are there any news on this?

--Hannes

On 12/28/14, Norbert Hartl <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I found markdown parsers in smalltalkhub and in the configuration browser.
>
> http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~PharoExtras/PetitMarkdown/
> <http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~PharoExtras/PetitMarkdown/>
>
> and the one in the configuration browser
>
> PPMarkdown
>
> If I understand it correctly both are rooted into work Camillo did. The one
> in PharoExtras looks newer to me. So I assume the best would be to copy the
> ConfigurationOfPetitMarkdown from PharoExtras to MetacelloRepo and remove
> the ConfigurationOfPPMarkdown. Right? Or are there any objections?
>
> Norbert

Damien Pollet
type less, do more [ | ] http://people.untyped.org/damien.pollet

demarey

Re: PetitMarkdown

In reply to this post by EstebanLM

Le 14 avr. 2015 à 11:43, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit :

> how complete it is?
> we would really like to think on:
>
> 1) include petitparser in Pharo
> 2) allow the writing of class docs in MD format :)

I would prefer pillar for class / packages comments

smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment

Peter Uhnak

Re: PetitMarkdown

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Christophe Demarey <[hidden email]> wrote:

Le 14 avr. 2015 à 11:43, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit :

> how complete it is?
> we would really like to think on:
>
> 1) include petitparser in Pharo
> 2) allow the writing of class docs in MD format :)

I would prefer pillar for class / packages comments

I was quite surprised there are any MD defendants considering the pillar push. But since diversity is (often) a good think maybe having something like gt-inspector there would be cool where you can add this in whatever format you want. (And maybe one day someone will write pillar to morphic/whatever converter and it would be even cooler.)

Peter

kurs.jan

Re: PetitMarkdown

Regarding completeness, it is not great. It was implement with an emphasiz on the indentation/prefix-related part (the hard one, I hope) so quoted blocks and and lists are almost complete (with arbitrary nesting). I did not need the other stuff, so there is a basic support for headers, paragraphs and code blocks. I followed the commonmark spec (http://spec.commonmark.org/0.17/).

If there is an interest to use PetitParser/CommonMark in Pharo, I can spend some time on it. I guess, I would be able to parse majority of the examples (I am not sure about all the corner cases).

Cheers,

Jan

On 14 April 2015 at 14:24, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Christophe Demarey <[hidden email]> wrote:

Le 14 avr. 2015 à 11:43, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit :

> how complete it is?
> we would really like to think on:
>
> 1) include petitparser in Pharo
> 2) allow the writing of class docs in MD format :)

I would prefer pillar for class / packages comments

I was quite surprised there are any MD defendants considering the pillar push. But since diversity is (often) a good think maybe having something like gt-inspector there would be cool where you can add this in whatever format you want. (And maybe one day someone will write pillar to morphic/whatever converter and it would be even cooler.)

Peter

NorbertHartl

Re: PetitMarkdown

In reply to this post by Peter Uhnak

Am 14.04.2015 um 14:24 schrieb Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]>:

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Christophe Demarey <[hidden email]> wrote:

Le 14 avr. 2015 à 11:43, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit :

> how complete it is?
> we would really like to think on:
>
> 1) include petitparser in Pharo
> 2) allow the writing of class docs in MD format :)

I would prefer pillar for class / packages comments

I was quite surprised there are any MD defendants considering the pillar push. But since diversity is (often) a good think maybe having something like gt-inspector there would be cool where you can add this in whatever format you want. (And maybe one day someone will write pillar to morphic/whatever converter and it would be even cooler.)

It is a difficult topic. I agree with anyone that MarkDown is not a good format for parsing. Pillar is the right thing to do here. But there is one point of MarkDown that is hard to beat. A MarkDown text is always good to read, eben while writing. In something like a class comment it would be easy to use. What we don't want is to write system documentation in a format that you need to convert first before you can see the result. It is either having a wysiwyg editor for those things with pillar below or a simple format that can both.

my 2 cents,

norbert

EstebanLM

Re: PetitMarkdown

On 14 Apr 2015, at 15:51, Norbert Hartl <[hidden email]> wrote:

Am 14.04.2015 um 14:24 schrieb Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]>:

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Christophe Demarey <[hidden email]> wrote:

Le 14 avr. 2015 à 11:43, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit :

> how complete it is?
> we would really like to think on:
>
> 1) include petitparser in Pharo
> 2) allow the writing of class docs in MD format :)

I would prefer pillar for class / packages comments

I was quite surprised there are any MD defendants considering the pillar push. But since diversity is (often) a good think maybe having something like gt-inspector there would be cool where you can add this in whatever format you want. (And maybe one day someone will write pillar to morphic/whatever converter and it would be even cooler.)

It is a difficult topic. I agree with anyone that MarkDown is not a good format for parsing. Pillar is the right thing to do here. But there is one point of MarkDown that is hard to beat. A MarkDown text is always good to read, eben while writing. In something like a class comment it would be easy to use. What we don't want is to write system documentation in a format that you need to convert first before you can see the result. It is either having a wysiwyg editor for those things with pillar below or a simple format that can both.

my 2 cents,

that’s actually my main point too, yes.

Esteban

norbert

stepharo

Re: PetitMarkdown

In reply to this post by EstebanLM

Le 14/4/15 11:43, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit :

how complete it is?
we would really like to think on:

1) include petitparser in Pharo

2) allow the writing of class docs in MD format :)

seriously?
With all the efforts and that damien and me are spending on pillar!
Thanks a lot for your consideration

of course, we are talking about the not-so-near future, but is an idea we are thinking about… :P

and in any case, I would like to use a good MD parser for my own stuff :)

Esteban

On 14 Apr 2015, at 10:42, Jan Kurš <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hey,

I also created an indentation sensitive extension of PetitParser, I also included some examples including Markdown. If you load PetitParser, you get the Markdown example as well.

There is a short introduction to the indentation:

http://scg.unibe.ch/research/indentParsing

Cheers Jan

On Apr 13, 2015 5:24 PM, "H. Hirzel" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Are there any news on this?

--Hannes

On 12/28/14, Norbert Hartl <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I found markdown parsers in smalltalkhub and in the configuration browser.
>
> http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~PharoExtras/PetitMarkdown/
> <http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~PharoExtras/PetitMarkdown/>
>
> and the one in the configuration browser
>
> PPMarkdown
>
> If I understand it correctly both are rooted into work Camillo did. The one
> in PharoExtras looks newer to me. So I assume the best would be to copy the
> ConfigurationOfPetitMarkdown from PharoExtras to MetacelloRepo and remove
> the ConfigurationOfPPMarkdown. Right? Or are there any objections?
>
> Norbert

stepharo

Re: PetitMarkdown

In reply to this post by EstebanLM

I'm really pissed off. Because nearly nobody tried to write anything with pillar and you just talk
about what you do not know. But thanks this is great to see that we are spending our energy for people
who will never even try to use what we are doing.
Superb!

No need to reply I will not read this thread anymore. And I should not even have because it was so obvious.

And yes I 'm REALLY pissed off. You should also say to cyril that what is is doing is hopeless because as soon
as we will have a stupid markdown parser suddenly it will be great. what a shit.

So go and write your documentation in any format and do not expect me to look at it.
I'm fed up about people that want doc on the web and when we spend time to migrate from latex to
pillar to generate html and latex do not even consider what we did.

Stef

I would prefer pillar for class / packages comments

I was quite surprised there are any MD defendants considering the pillar push. But since diversity is (often) a good think maybe having something like gt-inspector there would be cool where you can add this in whatever format you want. (And maybe one day someone will write pillar to morphic/whatever converter and it would be even cooler.)

It is a difficult topic. I agree with anyone that MarkDown is not a good format for parsing. Pillar is the right thing to do here. But there is one point of MarkDown that is hard to beat. A MarkDown text is always good to read, eben while writing. In something like a class comment it would be easy to use. What we don't want is to write system documentation in a format that you need to convert first before you can see the result. It is either having a wysiwyg editor for those things with pillar below or a simple format that can both.

my 2 cents,

that’s actually my main point too, yes.

Esteban

norbert

Tudor Girba-2

Re: PetitMarkdown

Hi,

MD is a cool exercise for PetitParser exactly because it is a terrible language. Jan did a great job at pushing parsing limits, but that does not mean that we have to jump on it to use it inside Pharo :).

Actually, at this point in time, I really do not quite understand why we are still entertaining the idea of MD inside Pharo given all the effort for documenting using Pillar.

In any case, as you might know, there already exists support for editing Pillar from inside Pharo (http://www.humane-assessment.com/blog/writing-pillar-books-with-the-gtinspector/), and we will likely develop significantly this support in the IDE.

Cheers,

Doru

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 9:08 PM, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote:

I'm really pissed off. Because nearly nobody tried to write anything with pillar and you just talk
about what you do not know. But thanks this is great to see that we are spending our energy for people
who will never even try to use what we are doing.
Superb!

No need to reply I will not read this thread anymore. And I should not even have because it was so obvious.

And yes I 'm REALLY pissed off. You should also say to cyril that what is is doing is hopeless because as soon
as we will have a stupid markdown parser suddenly it will be great. what a shit.

So go and write your documentation in any format and do not expect me to look at it.
I'm fed up about people that want doc on the web and when we spend time to migrate from latex to
pillar to generate html and latex do not even consider what we did.

Stef

I would prefer pillar for class / packages comments

I was quite surprised there are any MD defendants considering the pillar push. But since diversity is (often) a good think maybe having something like gt-inspector there would be cool where you can add this in whatever format you want. (And maybe one day someone will write pillar to morphic/whatever converter and it would be even cooler.)

It is a difficult topic. I agree with anyone that MarkDown is not a good format for parsing. Pillar is the right thing to do here. But there is one point of MarkDown that is hard to beat. A MarkDown text is always good to read, eben while writing. In something like a class comment it would be easy to use. What we don't want is to write system documentation in a format that you need to convert first before you can see the result. It is either having a wysiwyg editor for those things with pillar below or a simple format that can both.

my 2 cents,

that’s actually my main point too, yes.

Esteban

norbert

www.tudorgirba.com

"Every thing has its own flow"

Dmitri Zagidulin

Re: PetitMarkdown

In reply to this post by stepharo

Whoa.

I genuinely don't understand the fierce emotions here. Why do Pillar and Markdown have to be opposed? Why is wanting support for better parsing of MD (a commonly used format around the web, and useful in many projects) somehow an insult to the work done on Pillar?

(Incidentally, I don't quite understand why Pillar was created in the first place. Why have a slightly different and incompatible markdown format from what the rest of the world is using? But that's not the point. We have both, and it's easy to support both. What's the problem?)

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 3:08 PM, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote:

I'm really pissed off. Because nearly nobody tried to write anything with pillar and you just talk
about what you do not know. But thanks this is great to see that we are spending our energy for people
who will never even try to use what we are doing.
Superb!

No need to reply I will not read this thread anymore. And I should not even have because it was so obvious.

And yes I 'm REALLY pissed off. You should also say to cyril that what is is doing is hopeless because as soon
as we will have a stupid markdown parser suddenly it will be great. what a shit.

So go and write your documentation in any format and do not expect me to look at it.
I'm fed up about people that want doc on the web and when we spend time to migrate from latex to
pillar to generate html and latex do not even consider what we did.

Stef

I would prefer pillar for class / packages comments

I was quite surprised there are any MD defendants considering the pillar push. But since diversity is (often) a good think maybe having something like gt-inspector there would be cool where you can add this in whatever format you want. (And maybe one day someone will write pillar to morphic/whatever converter and it would be even cooler.)

It is a difficult topic. I agree with anyone that MarkDown is not a good format for parsing. Pillar is the right thing to do here. But there is one point of MarkDown that is hard to beat. A MarkDown text is always good to read, eben while writing. In something like a class comment it would be easy to use. What we don't want is to write system documentation in a format that you need to convert first before you can see the result. It is either having a wysiwyg editor for those things with pillar below or a simple format that can both.

my 2 cents,

that’s actually my main point too, yes.

Esteban

norbert

Sven Van Caekenberghe-2

Re: PetitMarkdown

> On 14 Apr 2015, at 22:03, Dmitri Zagidulin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Whoa.
> I genuinely don't understand the fierce emotions here. Why do Pillar and Markdown have to be opposed? Why is wanting support for better parsing of MD (a commonly used format around the web, and useful in many projects) somehow an insult to the work done on Pillar?
>
> (Incidentally, I don't quite understand why Pillar was created in the first place. Why have a slightly different and incompatible markdown format from what the rest of the world is using? But that's not the point. We have both, and it's easy to support both. What's the problem?)

Communication is always an issue, especially for newcomers.

Pillar was chosen because it is our format, something we control and define, something we can extend anyway we want, not somebody else's format that we can only follow.

Incidentally, Pillar precedes MarkDown by years.

Furthermore, there is NO MarkDown standard, nor will there ever be. There are slight but annoying differences between the main implementors. It is super hard to write a parser for MD.

Anyway, IMHO, the key thing is the underlying document model.

> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 3:08 PM, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I'm really pissed off. Because nearly nobody tried to write anything with pillar and you just talk
> about what you do not know. But thanks this is great to see that we are spending our energy for people
> who will never even try to use what we are doing.
> Superb!
>
> No need to reply I will not read this thread anymore. And I should not even have because it was so obvious.
>
> And yes I 'm REALLY pissed off. You should also say to cyril that what is is doing is hopeless because as soon
> as we will have a stupid markdown parser suddenly it will be great. what a shit.
>
> So go and write your documentation in any format and do not expect me to look at it.
> I'm fed up about people that want doc on the web and when we spend time to migrate from latex to
> pillar to generate html and latex do not even consider what we did.
>
> Stef
>
>>>> I would prefer pillar for class / packages comments
>>>>
>>>> I was quite surprised there are any MD defendants considering the pillar push. But since diversity is (often) a good think maybe having something like gt-inspector there would be cool where you can add this in whatever format you want. (And maybe one day someone will write pillar to morphic/whatever converter and it would be even cooler.)
>>>>
>>> It is a difficult topic. I agree with anyone that MarkDown is not a good format for parsing. Pillar is the right thing to do here. But there is one point of MarkDown that is hard to beat. A MarkDown text is always good to read, eben while writing. In something like a class comment it would be easy to use. What we don't want is to write system documentation in a format that you need to convert first before you can see the result. It is either having a wysiwyg editor for those things with pillar below or a simple format that can both.
>>>
>>> my 2 cents,
>>
>>
>> that’s actually my main point too, yes.
>>
>> Esteban
>>
>>>
>>> norbert
>>
>
>

philippeback

Re: PetitMarkdown

In reply to this post by Dmitri Zagidulin

Some should cool down.

I am using Pillar to write my (internal) docs.

And I use markdown too.

Both have their uses.

Compared to things like RMarkdown, knitr, and RPubs in the R community, what we do have is passable in terms of output. We have a small community, we have to deal with that fact.

I hate the figures not going where I want due to the LaTeX generation in Pillar.

As for class comments, markdown would make more sense to use when putting files under source control on git and then stored in github because filetree generates README.md files for such comments.

It makes for a nice reading there. In that respect, Pillar class comments will be more of a nuisance than a help.

For generating web documentation, it is easier to provide markdown so that any web framework will be able to convert (e;g; Showdown.js and 2 lines of code).

Furthermore, a lot of Pillar files embed non pillar markup for special things.

For me, Pillar is for the books. And speciality applications that use the visitors to produce other stuff (among which Markdown).

As for writing stuff, I do md and pillar files in Vim. So much for specific tools that weren't satisfying when writing. Too slow, too cumbersome, not enough power for editing (compared to Vim, yeah, nothing comes close in terms of speed once you know the tricks).

Phil

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 10:03 PM, Dmitri Zagidulin <[hidden email]> wrote:

Whoa.
I genuinely don't understand the fierce emotions here. Why do Pillar and Markdown have to be opposed? Why is wanting support for better parsing of MD (a commonly used format around the web, and useful in many projects) somehow an insult to the work done on Pillar?

(Incidentally, I don't quite understand why Pillar was created in the first place. Why have a slightly different and incompatible markdown format from what the rest of the world is using? But that's not the point. We have both, and it's easy to support both. What's the problem?)

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 3:08 PM, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote:

I'm really pissed off. Because nearly nobody tried to write anything with pillar and you just talk
about what you do not know. But thanks this is great to see that we are spending our energy for people
who will never even try to use what we are doing.
Superb!

No need to reply I will not read this thread anymore. And I should not even have because it was so obvious.

And yes I 'm REALLY pissed off. You should also say to cyril that what is is doing is hopeless because as soon
as we will have a stupid markdown parser suddenly it will be great. what a shit.

So go and write your documentation in any format and do not expect me to look at it.
I'm fed up about people that want doc on the web and when we spend time to migrate from latex to
pillar to generate html and latex do not even consider what we did.

Stef

I would prefer pillar for class / packages comments

I was quite surprised there are any MD defendants considering the pillar push. But since diversity is (often) a good think maybe having something like gt-inspector there would be cool where you can add this in whatever format you want. (And maybe one day someone will write pillar to morphic/whatever converter and it would be even cooler.)

It is a difficult topic. I agree with anyone that MarkDown is not a good format for parsing. Pillar is the right thing to do here. But there is one point of MarkDown that is hard to beat. A MarkDown text is always good to read, eben while writing. In something like a class comment it would be easy to use. What we don't want is to write system documentation in a format that you need to convert first before you can see the result. It is either having a wysiwyg editor for those things with pillar below or a simple format that can both.

my 2 cents,

that’s actually my main point too, yes.

Esteban

norbert

Dmitri Zagidulin

Re: PetitMarkdown

In reply to this post by Sven Van Caekenberghe-2

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:

Furthermore, there is NO MarkDown standard, nor will there ever be. There are slight but annoying differences between the main implementors.

Not true. There is at least http://spec.commonmark.org/

It is super hard to write a parser for MD.

What do you mean? Why?

Dmitri Zagidulin

Re: PetitMarkdown

In reply to this post by kurs.jan

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Jan Kurš <[hidden email]> wrote:

If there is an interest to use PetitParser/CommonMark in Pharo, I can spend some time on it. I guess, I would be able to parse majority of the examples (I am not sure about all the corner cases).

That would be fantastic!

In general, even regardless of the use case of using MD for in-Pharo documentation, the ability to parse Markdown is pretty fundamental to a programming language (behind only JSON, XML, and CSV).

kilon.alios

Re: PetitMarkdown

In reply to this post by Dmitri Zagidulin

Stef gets "fierce emotional" at times, he is very passionate about Pharo. I dont think he has a problem with having a good MD parser though it looks like that will be hard to do because of the nature of the MD syntax but his real problem is people porting doc to MD and abandoning or not even giving Pillar a serious try. That is something that concerns me too.

I agree with Stef that Pillar is really nice and frankly MD has little to offer over Pillar. I also dont agree that MD is significantly more readable than Pillar to justify choosing MD over Pillar. Also making a document format tailor made for Pharo needs and ideology comes with its own big benefit that may not be obvious on the short term but long term may make a big difference.

I agree also having control over your own format is always a big benefit.

Also Pillar is not opposed to MD , quite the contrary it generates MD files as it does HTML , LATEX and PDF files.

When I started using Pharo I also did not understand this obsession of remaking so much technology in pharo. But now I know that the moment you integrate something from scratch into a very powerful live environment like Pharo it becomes a completely new thing. It becomes a live thing. Its definitely make the effort well worth it. Now I am also a victim of this "curse" ;)

I love Pillar, its super easy to learn, very easy to read and well its made with Pharo which make it also easier to extend. Hands down a winner in my book ;)

Go Pillar Go! :)

Ps: Help tool already support a very small part of Pillar syntax with its wikisyntax pragma.

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Dmitri Zagidulin <[hidden email]> wrote:

Whoa.
I genuinely don't understand the fierce emotions here. Why do Pillar and Markdown have to be opposed? Why is wanting support for better parsing of MD (a commonly used format around the web, and useful in many projects) somehow an insult to the work done on Pillar?

(Incidentally, I don't quite understand why Pillar was created in the first place. Why have a slightly different and incompatible markdown format from what the rest of the world is using? But that's not the point. We have both, and it's easy to support both. What's the problem?)

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 3:08 PM, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote:

I'm really pissed off. Because nearly nobody tried to write anything with pillar and you just talk
about what you do not know. But thanks this is great to see that we are spending our energy for people
who will never even try to use what we are doing.
Superb!

No need to reply I will not read this thread anymore. And I should not even have because it was so obvious.

And yes I 'm REALLY pissed off. You should also say to cyril that what is is doing is hopeless because as soon
as we will have a stupid markdown parser suddenly it will be great. what a shit.

So go and write your documentation in any format and do not expect me to look at it.
I'm fed up about people that want doc on the web and when we spend time to migrate from latex to
pillar to generate html and latex do not even consider what we did.

Stef

I would prefer pillar for class / packages comments

I was quite surprised there are any MD defendants considering the pillar push. But since diversity is (often) a good think maybe having something like gt-inspector there would be cool where you can add this in whatever format you want. (And maybe one day someone will write pillar to morphic/whatever converter and it would be even cooler.)

It is a difficult topic. I agree with anyone that MarkDown is not a good format for parsing. Pillar is the right thing to do here. But there is one point of MarkDown that is hard to beat. A MarkDown text is always good to read, eben while writing. In something like a class comment it would be easy to use. What we don't want is to write system documentation in a format that you need to convert first before you can see the result. It is either having a wysiwyg editor for those things with pillar below or a simple format that can both.

my 2 cents,

that’s actually my main point too, yes.

Esteban

norbert

Damien Pollet

Re: PetitMarkdown

In reply to this post by Dmitri Zagidulin

On 14 April 2015 at 23:11, Dmitri Zagidulin <[hidden email]> wrote:

It is super hard to write a parser for MD.

What do you mean? Why?

The syntax depends on indentation and block layout of text. It's very hard to express using the usual grammar tools. In PetitMarkdown, before Jan added indent-aware parsing to PetitParser, I was thinking of doing multi-pass parsing, first recognizing block-level, then inline syntax.

The closest thing to a standard is John Gruber's reference implementation, and that is a sequence of regular expression search-and-replace passes. Not exactly what you'd call a grammar :)

Anyway… https://twitter.com/willmanduffy/status/588057382225346560

Damien Pollet
type less, do more [ | ] http://people.untyped.org/damien.pollet