Hmm, here are some cases that really oughtn't fail;
even if they're
probably rare, they're perfectly legit. Using a pattern twice on the
same line shouldn't cause it to fail. :(
'''em-strong''''' normal ''em
<em>em <strong>em-strong<em><strong> normal </em>em
Ah, I see.
Well, I've already sort of concluded (and now for certain) that regexps
won't do this. You shouldn't have made Wiki-markup use the same
character (') for two concepts that can be nested. You should have used
'' for em and "" for strong. :-p
Now, the case you described at least produces completely wrong output,
which is better than wrong HTML that renders right. This forces the
author to go back and check. Eventually they will realise that they can
get it to work by putting a linebreak in between (which obviously won't
put a linebreak in the final output, so you're okay).
An alternate implementation, incidentally, might be to
treat '' and
''' as toggles rather than nestable delimiters, and ensure that the
correct nesting level in the output HTML is maintained upon changing
Yes, that would have been my second implementation plan, but I don't
think that'll be possible with just regexps.
Posting to the list is the most likely way to get
people to look it
over. If we ever get around to setting up a CVS commit notification
mailer that would do as well...
Hm, I'm sorry, but this didn't really answer my question. Are you going
to commit the patch for me (once I've made it work satisfactorily), or
are you going to give me CVS write access? I'm wondering this because
copying & pasting patches from e-mails seems like a very inefficient way
of handling it; certainly that can't be how you handle contributions
from other developers?
Thanks a lot for your help, insight, etc.