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.