Re: Add a newline after a LineBreak to writers?

[John MacFarlane <jgm-TVLZxgkOlNX2fBVCVOL8/A@public.gmane.org>]

OK, let's just make it insensitive to `--no-wrap`, with a line break either way.

+++ Tim Lin [Feb 04 15 17:42 ]:
>The no wrap thing sounds sensible, although I really have no idea whether
>more people expect the whole block to be unwrapped or just the individual
>lines.
>
>Personally I would expect `--no-wrap` output to be useful for editing
>without needing text reflowing functionality. With that assumption,
>unwrapping individual lines but breaking at the LineBreaks seems to me to
>be the most friendly behavior for editing.
>
>
>On Wednesday, 4 February 2015 09:57:18 UTC-8, John MacFarlane wrote:
>>
>> I think this is a good idea.  (But maybe we should make it sensitive to
>> `--no-wrap`, and omit the newline if `--no-wrap`?)
>>
>> +++ Tim Lin [Feb 03 15 17:46 ]:
>> >I'm using the line-block construct extensively fro writing pseudocode. It
>> >usually works great, but boy does the rendered output look ugly. Here's
>> an
>> >example of what one of my typical algorithms can end up looking in LaTeX:
>> >
>> >\texttt{\ 1.}~\textbf{Inputs}:~variables~$A, b$\\\texttt{\
>> >2.}~\textbf{Output}:~$\phi$~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\texttt{//this\ is\ a\
>> comment}\texttt{\
>> >3.}~Choose~an~initial~guess~$\phi$~to~the~solution\\\texttt{\
>> >4.}~~\textbf{repeat}~until~convergence\\\texttt{\
>> >5.}~~~~\textbf{for}~$i$~\textbf{from}~1~\textbf{until}~$n$~\textbf{do}\\\texttt{\
>>
>> >6.}~~~~~~~~$\sigma \leftarrow 0$\\\texttt{\
>> >7.}~~~~~~~~\textbf{for}~$j$~\textbf{from}~1~\textbf{until}~$n$~\textbf{do}\\\texttt{\
>>
>> >8.}~~~~~~~~~~~~\textbf{if}~$j \ne i$~\textbf{then}\\\texttt{\
>> >9.}~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~$\sigma \leftarrow \sigma + a_{ij}
>> >\phi_j$\\\texttt{10.}~~~~~~~~~~~~\textbf{end~if}\\\texttt{11.}~~~~~~~~\textbf{end}~($j$-loop)\\\texttt{12.}~~~~~~~~$\phi_i
>>
>> >\leftarrow \frac 1 {a_{ii}} (b_i -
>> >\sigma)$\\\texttt{13.}~~~~\textbf{end}~($i$-loop)\\\texttt{14.}~~~~check~if~convergence~is~reached\\\texttt{15.}~\textbf{end}~(repeat)
>>
>> >
>> >It's serviceable, but really hard to play with for a human. The HTML
>> writer
>> >doesn't far much better. I realize that line-block are a special case
>> where
>> >the usage of LineBreak can easily get out of control.
>> >
>> >I wonder if it's better to add a newline after each LineBreak inline
>> >element. I'm really just targeting line-blocks, but as they don't have
>> >their own block-level type the only alternative is to change LineBreak
>> >behavior. The above example would then look like this:
>> >
>> >\texttt{\ 1.}~\textbf{Inputs}:~variables~$A, b$\\
>> >\texttt{\ 2.}~\textbf{Output}:~$\phi$~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\texttt{//this\ is\
>> a\
>> >comment}
>> >\texttt{\ 3.}~Choose~an~initial~guess~$\phi$~to~the~solution\\
>> >\texttt{\ 4.}~~\textbf{repeat}~until~convergence\\
>> >\texttt{\
>> >5.}~~~~\textbf{for}~$i$~\textbf{from}~1~\textbf{until}~$n$~\textbf{do}\\
>> >\texttt{\ 6.}~~~~~~~~$\sigma \leftarrow 0$\\
>> >\texttt{\
>> >7.}~~~~~~~~\textbf{for}~$j$~\textbf{from}~1~\textbf{until}~$n$~\textbf{do}\\
>>
>> >\texttt{\ 8.}~~~~~~~~~~~~\textbf{if}~$j \ne i$~\textbf{then}\\
>> >\texttt{\ 9.}~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~$\sigma \leftarrow \sigma + a_{ij} \phi_j$\\
>> >\texttt{10.}~~~~~~~~~~~~\textbf{end~if}\\
>> >\texttt{11.}~~~~~~~~\textbf{end}~($j$-loop)\\
>> >\texttt{12.}~~~~~~~~$\phi_i \leftarrow \frac 1 {a_{ii}} (b_i - \sigma)$\\
>> >\texttt{13.}~~~~\textbf{end}~($i$-loop)\\
>> >\texttt{14.}~~~~check~if~convergence~is~reached\\\texttt{15.}~\textbf{end}~(repeat)
>>
>> >
>> >I can't really think of any negative ramification off the top of my head.
>> >I'd appreciate any help thinking about whether this would break anything.
>> >
>> >--
>> >You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "pandoc-discuss" group.
>> >To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to pandoc-discus...-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org <javascript:>.
>> >To post to this group, send email to pandoc-...-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
>> <javascript:>.
>> >To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/b25e52ed-107c-4f32-a128-b9b68c149ce4%40googlegroups.com.
>>
>> >For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>>
>
>-- 
>You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pandoc-discuss" group.
>To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pandoc-discuss+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
>To post to this group, send email to pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
>To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/eef791a5-f76f-4e98-a2bc-0e63c79bc7db%40googlegroups.com.
>For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.