From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,50e705cdf2767cc6
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder1-2.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder2-2.proxad.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool1.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Parser interface design
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <slrnipof32.2fnq.lithiumcat@sigil.instinctive.eu>
 <4d9c8c19$0$6769$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <slrnips50m.2fnq.lithiumcat@sigil.instinctive.eu>
 <m21v1dvhmi.fsf@pushface.org>
 <slrnipu5cr.2fnq.lithiumcat@sigil.instinctive.eu>
 <m2wrj4tsz1.fsf@pushface.org>
 <slrniq8uha.2fnq.lithiumcat@sigil.instinctive.eu>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 19:22:32 +0200
Message-ID: <1ovsbvdul64pw$.1q49g3o7n296m$.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 Apr 2011 19:22:31 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 5af956c6.newsspool3.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=^13?PTa=ogm^Y=RbYBPl4`McF=Q^Z^V3h4Fo<]lROoRa8kF<OcfhCOka]LNHib7JTk[6LHn;2LCVn[<mhadbfdUkEOEU\^^kmmnc\o3U_Wc8ic
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:19747
Date: 2011-04-12T19:22:31+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 16:13:30 +0000 (UTC), Natasha Kerensikova wrote:

> On 2011-04-08, Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org> wrote:

>> In other words, HTML.Emphasize ("bar") would return "<b>bar</b>", but
>> No_Op ("bar") would just return "bar".
> 
> And that's exactly why disabling emphasis should be done on the parser
> level: the callback only has the semantic information ("render bar
> emphasized") without any knowledge of how it was obtained (the source
> could have been "foo *bar* baz" or "foo _bar_ baz"). Therefore no
> callback can reconstruct the intact input.

That looks wrong to me. I think that obvious design is to move it to the
renderer:

   HTML.Emphasize ("bar")  -> "<b>bar</b>"
   ASCII.Emphasize ("bar")  -> "*bar*"
   Plain_Text.Emphasize ("bar")  -> "bar"
   Gtk_Text_Buffer.Emphasize ("bar")  -> sets tags around the text slice
   ...

Parser just calls On_Emphasize, the implementation of routes it to the
renderer's Emphasize, which figures out what to do.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de