|
|
|
|
|
|
by cdosborn
4325 days ago
|
|
|
The project is still early, and the html generation is rudimentary. Will be working soon to validate. Not sure what you mean by appearing twice. I debated removing the "<< >>" syntax in the generated html, but I don't think it's bad. It's essentially the syntax for macros, which aid in providing context. It's useful in html, because you can quickly refer to the defn of a macro by following the anchor. |
|
|
lit only has two valid constructs: A macro definition: << ... >>= and a macro reference: << ... >>
...from my experience with other macro systems, I assumed that a "macro reference" would be replaced with the content of the macro definition, leading the code-block to appear at the top (under the star macro) and also in the macro definition. I'm pleased to see that's not the case.
I'd rather not have the "<< >>" syntax in the resulting HTML, because it's the syntax for Lit macros... if I'm writing a document in human language A to explain concept B in programming language C, that's already a lot of context, and requiring the reader to also be familiar with literate-programming-tool D is a drawback.
Linking to macro definitions is definitely a useful feature, but I'd rather those links were distinguished with a CSS class so that I could define their location and appearance in the stylesheet, rather than giving them specific text and markup.