Kārlis Gaņģis
Kārlis Gaņģis
perhaps `ignorePrefix (boolean)` argument could be added both to `getAll()` and `flush()`. Or perhaps `options` with `noPrefix` field.
There are no current plans for myself to implement any additional features that are not in the spec since there are pending work from the recent spec versions that require...
My answer hasn't really changed since last august... There have been some work on the tables though that you might find useful: - https://github.com/AMDL/CommonMark.NET/tree/pipe-tables - https://github.com/kevin-montrose/CommonMark.NET/tree/ast-transforms-and-tables-squashed
Thank you! I will review as soon as I can find enough free time. The worst case scenario ir right after Easter when I have some free days though I...
I think that a second property that uses the same backing field plus obsoleting the previous property. Heading sounds fine but the thematic break... I agree with your statement there...
In case of the heading the struct would only have a single field - which is why it does not have its own struct yet. As for the weak emphasis...
Have you thought about any mechanisms how extensions like FancyLists would be supported from external assemblies that cannot modify Block and Inline classes?
Yes, I don't see a reason for not doing this. If you merge the changes needed for 0.11 in master I could push the release to nuget.
https://github.com/Knagis/CommonMark.NET/blob/master/CommonMark/Parser/InlineMethods.cs#L935 I suspect that it will be enough to remove the check for space and newline.
I will take a look at the new tests in a few hours.