Text reflow woes (or: I want bullets back!)y

[solderpunk]

On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 05:55:04PM -0500, Sean Conner wrote:

It seems easiest to me (and my current experimental implementation in
AV-98 does this) to make the spec quite strict in this regard: verbatim
mode is toggled on/off by lines consisting of precisely 3 ticks and
nothing else.  Which means...
 
> ````
> Note that there are four ticks.
>   What's the expected result?
>     Literal text?
>       Or reflowed text?
> ```

The first 5 lines of this will be reflowed, the final line will trigger
literal text below it.

> ```
> This is similar to the above,
>   but the block ends with four ticks,
>     not the expecte three.
> ````

Literal mode is turned on by the first line but never turned off, so
there will be a literal line of four ticks and that end, and whatever
comes lext will be literalised, too!
 
> ``` What about trailing text?
>   Is that allowd?
>     What is the expected result?
> ```

Literal mode won't be turned on until the very end, and the first three
lines will be flowed.

> ```
> ```
> 
> (You should be able to handle the above as well).

Hmm, I think AV-98 will handle that just fine, hang on...yep, no
problems.

>   One thing to watch out for are lines that exceed the wrapping length with
> no space (or dash if you are ambitious) characters to break on.

Ah, that's an annoying edge case.  I guess such lines can just be broken
at exactly the viewport width, possibly with a dash at the end of all
but the final line?
 
>   I want to say Python.  I don't program in Python, but I know I have seen
> that syntax in some lanuage.

I was briefly worried about Python docstrings (before Tomasino pointed
out we aren't using quotes at all!), but PEP 257 recommends always using
double quotes for them anyway.

Cheers,
Solderpunk