PROPOSAL: Literate Haskell in markdown noation

[Simon Hengel]

I'm not against adding this to GHC, but it's trivial to have it as a
separate program (see my markdown-unlit [1]).  Maybe the external
program is more flexible when it comes to extending/bug fixing?

But if you decide to add it to GHC, then please also add test cases for
the proposed code.

As a side note, ```-style code block are not part of "standard"
markdown.

Cheers,
Simon Hengel

[1] http://hackage.haskell.org/package/markdown-unlit

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 01:25:43PM -0700, Iavor Diatchki wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I think that good support for writing literate Haskell in markdown notation
> would be great!  Over the weekend I updated the wiki page with a fairly
> detailed description of the proposal, which Trevor implemented.
> 
> What do folks think about the feature, and if we are happy with the design,
> would there be objections if I merged it in?
> 
> -Iavor
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Trevor Elliott <trevor at galois.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I've implemented support for literate markdown in a branch [1].  After
> > doing a search on the bug tracker to see if anyone had already worked on
> > this I came across bug #4836 [2], which details some unexpected
> > interactions between the markdown format, unlit and CPP.  Specifically,
> > unlit attempts to keep CPP in the comment sections of a literate file,
> > which clashes with the way that headings are defined in markdown.
> >
> > The approach that I took is that when GHC is processing markdown files, it
> > passes the -r and -# flags to unlit, causing it to remove CPP in the
> > comment parts of the file.  I've added support for .markdown and .md as
> > source file extensions supported by GHC to be able to detect when this is
> > necessary.  CPP can still be used within code blocks, giving a path forward
> > for the case where the file was generated by something that wishes to leave
> > #line markers.  I've documented the changes on the wiki at [3].
> >
> > Does this approach sound reasonable?  If so, should I attach a patch to
> > #4836, or create a new ticket?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > --trevor
> >
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/elliottt/**ghc/tree/literate-markdown<https://github.com/elliottt/ghc/tree/literate-markdown>
> > [2] http://hackage.haskell.org/**trac/ghc/ticket/4836<http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/4836>
> > [3] http://hackage.haskell.org/**trac/ghc/wiki/LiterateMarkdown<http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/LiterateMarkdown>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ghc-devs mailing list
> > ghc-devs at haskell.org
> > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
> >
> >

> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs