7 ms·

Is there a need for that much of abstraction in a simple markdown parser library?

• donatj 12y ago
  It does feel like a bit much.
• pan69 12y ago
  What abstraction are you specifically referring to if I my ask?
  • nacs 12y ago
    I think parent post is just referring to the number of classes in the source.
• deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
• alexbilbie 12y ago
  By abstracting to the extent that the author has it should be simple to add other syntaxes to the library (e.g. rST -> HTML)
  • laacz 12y ago
    Yes, but project is called CommonMark, so it's markdown only.
    • alexbilbie 12y ago
      I appreciate that, we argued to death on the League internals about the focus of the package: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/thephpleague/cJECuC5TsGQ https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/thephpleague/cJECuC5... https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/thephpleague/YBSnpS6dra8 https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/thephpleague/YBSnpS6...
    • philstu 12y ago
      rST > HTML is less likely, but CommonMark > PDF could definitely be a thing.
• philstu 12y ago
  It depends which bit you're talking about. A lot of implementations in various languages go with static regex approaches, which is a bit shit. This uses an AST which helps out a lot. By adding the customization elements, people can write "GitHub Tables" or any sort of other extra syntax in. And by keeping the HTML Rendering separate from the parsing process, other PDF renderers or whatever else could be added. Somebody could make a [Maruka](http://markua.org/ http://markua.org/) extension for example, which is just CommonMark + Extra tags + PDF / eBook / etc. It's not madness, and it will be optimized over time. Fear not. :)