[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 0/3] Add CommonMark reader

From: Arun Isaac
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Add CommonMark reader
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 21:13:10 +0000

Hi Ludo,

>> Why the explicit listing of inputs? It seems less redundant to inherit
>> from the upstream Guix package
> I thought the two might diverge, as in this case: we need Autotools and
> guile-commonmark, so I find it somewhat clearer to be explicit about
> what we expect.

I think any divergence would be temporary. The divergence would be
resolved after the next release and the Guix upstream skribilo package
is updated. Addition of autotools would remain, and that's ok. If we
listed inputs explicitly, we would have to maintain the same list in two
different places (in Guix upstream and in the skribilo repo).

> Looks like there’s material for a new release, with the two new
> readers.

Two? Do you mean the gemtext reader? We already released that as part of

But, you're right. Even the commonmark reader alone is grounds for a new

> BTW, I figured the fact that readers emit code as sexps is pretty bad:
> it’s an additional layer that makes things more brittle and less
> efficient, because we need to pass that sexp through ‘eval’, and there
> could well be undefined variables and the likes.  It would be more
> natural for readers to return a <document> object.

I definitely agree. One of many dated decisions in skribilo for
sure. Could you describe what this <document> object should be
like?—what fields it should have, etc. Might come in handy if I or
someone else works on it later.

And, thanks again for the commonmark reader! :-)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]