April 2015 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] PetitMarkdown

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

I am sorry, but I don't think you really have looked at this in detail. Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markdown History & Extensions, just to known about some of the differences out there. Any language without any formal spec is close to impossible to parse well, it is just hacking. Note that the original MD allows HTML inside ! WTF ? But if it is so easy, please write your own parser. Many have tried, many have failed. Or go read the code of one of them. Here is a cool attempt: http://www.greghendershott.com/2013/11/markdown-parser-redesign.html The fact that github implements their own variant and made it convenient says nothing. For the record, I am using MD myself. > On 14 Apr 2015, at 23:11, Dmitri Zagidulin <dmitri(a)zagidulin.net> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> 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? >

April 14, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] PetitMarkdown

by Damien Pollet

On 14 April 2015 at 23:11, Dmitri Zagidulin <dmitri(a)zagidulin.net> 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 :) Anywayâ¦ https://twitter.com/willmanduffy/status/588057382225346560 -- Damien Pollet type less, do more [ | ] http://people.untyped.org/damien.pollet

April 14, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] PetitMarkdown

by kilon alios

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 <dmitri(a)zagidulin.net> 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 <stepharo(a)free.fr> 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, >> >> >> >> thatâs actually my main point too, yes. >> >> Esteban >> >> >> norbert >> >> >> >> >

April 14, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] PetitMarkdown

by Dmitri Zagidulin

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Jan KurÅ¡ <kurs(a)iam.unibe.ch> 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).

April 14, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] PetitMarkdown

by Dmitri Zagidulin

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> 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?

April 14, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] PetitMarkdown

by phil＠highoctane.be

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 <dmitri(a)zagidulin.net> 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 <stepharo(a)free.fr> 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, >> >> >> >> thatâs actually my main point too, yes. >> >> Esteban >> >> >> norbert >> >> >> >> > -

April 14, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Urgent]: Clean up Download Instructions before 4.0 Release

by Sean P. DeNigris

Dale Henrichs-3 wrote > Ubuntu14.04 tale of the ldd tape Thanks! I'll dig into these tomorrow. ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Urgent-Clean-up-Download-Instructions-before-4-0-Rele… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

April 14, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] PetitMarkdown

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

> On 14 Apr 2015, at 22:03, Dmitri Zagidulin <dmitri(a)zagidulin.net> 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 <stepharo(a)free.fr> 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, >> >> >> thatâs actually my main point too, yes. >> >> Esteban >> >>> >>> norbert >> > >

April 14, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] PetitMarkdown

by Dmitri Zagidulin

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 <stepharo(a)free.fr> 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, > > > > thatâs actually my main point too, yes. > > Esteban > > > norbert > > > >

April 14, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] PetitMarkdown

by Tudor Girba

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-gtinspe…) and we will likely develop significantly this support in the IDE. Cheers, Doru On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 9:08 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> 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, > > > > thatâs actually my main point too, yes. > > Esteban > > > norbert > > > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"

April 14, 2015