all right, will get something going tonight On Wednesday, 4 February 2015 19:52:52 UTC-8, John MacFarlane wrote: > > 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 . > >> >To post to this group, send email to pandoc-...-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org > >> . > >> >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-discus...-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org . > >To post to this group, send email to pandoc-...-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@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. > > -- 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/b115520b-6af7-4fae-b95d-50a759c2ef5d%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.