-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 450
Ignore inline keys when they appear in an inline codeblock. #2542
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Ignore inline keys when they appear in an inline codeblock. #2542
Conversation
4ba0774
to
359c4b7
Compare
Before even considering to merge this, please clean up your code and remove unwanted |
359c4b7
to
8bbb962
Compare
Woops, sorry about that. |
8bbb962
to
266a2c1
Compare
@holroy This PR should now be more comprehensive than the initial proposal. |
After looking a little closer into the actual change, I think we need to discuss this a little further. Your code ignores any escaped backticks, and it is used in a context where the function is indicating that we're only looking for the inline separator. This means that this function is most likely also used when we're looking for separators in entire paragraphs being used as field definitions, and possibly other cases. In other words, the scoping of this change is wrong, although the idea of ignoring inline keys could be pursued further. Where and how to it though needs to be discussed a little further. |
Hehe, that’s the kind of thing I expected to have missed. I’m happy to relocate it to where it belong. Would you be able to advise on the proper location? With regards to the backtick escaping, I tried to replicate what obsidian does in the markdown interpretation, i.e. escape backticks only outside codeblocks. So here we only ignore the backtick if it is found to be an "entry" to a code block. |
I'm currently working on releasing a new version of dataview and having some issues with that, but in due time I'll come back to you hopefully. Not sure where and how to tackle this issue, but using |
This change attempts at fixing this.