in reply to Re: Web forum markup language and the Monastery ([[...]])
in thread Web forum markup language and the Monastery

I think for a site supporting a perl like language that <[...]> might be better. Its a little uglier, but IMO a lot less likely to occur in code.

---
demerphq

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Web forum markup language and the Monastery ([[...]])
by szabgab (Priest) on Jan 16, 2005 at 11:46 UTC
    I am not sure one needs to be able to include shortcuts in the code snippets. PerlMonks does not let me. At least not in this response: 
    [Code]

    [download]
    Then I only have to cae that the end-of-code sequence (</code> in PerlMonks) is not likely to occure in code.
[reply]
[d/l]

      I think you have misunderstood me. Any perl program that uses arrays (which will be a good chunk of them) is highly likely to contain code that has [...] in it. Which _requires_ that the user know the html entity name for square brackets or requires that the user wrap even trivial code snippets in code tags. By using a shortcut pattern that is extremely unlikely to occur in the language this would have been avoided. Its the same reason that tye recommends using [[shortcut]] except IMO that pattern occurs all to often in perl code (arrays of arrays) so something even less likely to be found in code would be IMO better.

      The base point i think is that it shouldnt be necessary to wrap stuff in code tags. Doing so should work and maintain indentation and etc, but it shouldnt be required just to post a trivial piece of code.

      ---
      demerphq

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]

In Section Meditations