Ah, my ◊comment's won't evaluate inside a ◊ol[…], so I guess there's that.
On Wednesday, March 13, 2019 at 3:18:03 PM UTC-5, Brendan Stromberger wrote:
>
> Is there a reason the curly-brace syntax is preferable? I've tried for the
> past 2 hours but using filter-split on "\n" seems to have no effect on my
> output. It seems more explicit to me to just use the ◊(ul[…]) form and not
> have to do any mangling of xexprs.
>
> I think this is what you were suggesting?
>
> (define (ul . elements)
> (case (current-poly-target)
> [(txt) elements]
> [else (txexpr 'ul empty
> (map (lambda (e) (txexpr 'li empty e)) (filter-split elements (λ (e) (
> equal? e "\n")))))]))
>
> On Sunday, March 10, 2019 at 8:22:40 PM UTC-5, Matthew Butterick wrote:
>>
>> The curly-brace syntax is almost always preferable. Keep in mind that the
>> linebreaks are separated into their own elements (For more on this behavior
>> see [1].) So this markup:
>>
>> ◊ol{The remaining forty-nine stalks ◊(comment "" ",") two piles.
>> another item
>> another item
>> }
>>
>> Produces this list of five (not three) elements:
>>
>> '("The remaining forty-nine stalks "
>> (comment "" ",")
>> " two piles."
>> "\n"
>> "another item"
>> "\n"
>> "another item")
>>
>> Probably what you want is to preprocess `elements` into bigger chunks
>> representing list items before passing each to your 'li tag lambda. For
>> instance this:
>>
>> (require sugar/list)
>> (filter-split '("The remaining forty-nine stalks "
>> (comment "" ",")
>> " two piles."
>> "\n"
>> "another item"
>> "\n"
>> "another item")
>> (λ (e) (equal? e "\n")))
>>
>>
>> Produces these sublists:
>>
>> '(("The remaining forty-nine stalks " (comment "" ",") " two piles.")
>> ("another item")
>> ("another item"))
>>
>> For a more elaborate example of list-item detection, see the
>> `detect-list-items` function [2] in the pollen-tfl sample project.
>>
>> [1]
>> https://docs.racket-lang.org/pollen/pollen-command-syntax.html#%28part._the-text-body%29
>>
>> [2]
>> https://docs.racket-lang.org/pollen-tfl/_pollen_rkt_.html#%28def._%28%28lib._pollen-tfl%2Fpollen..rkt%29._detect-list-items%29%29
>>
>> On Mar 10, 2019, at 4:08 PM, Brendan Stromberger <brendanst...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hey there, still plugging away on my book project. I have a function for
>> an ordered list:
>>
>> (define (ol . elements)
>> (case (current-poly-target)
>> [(txt) elements]
>> [else (txexpr 'ol empty
>> (map (lambda (e) (txexpr 'li empty (list e))) elements))]))
>>
>> And I am using it like so:
>>
>> ◊ol[
>> "The remaining forty-nine stalks are laid down and, aiming at the middle
>> of the pile with the right thumb◊(comment "" ",") two piles are
>> separated."
>> "another item"
>> "another item"
>> ]
>>
>> I want to use it this way because if I use the ◊ol{} syntax, my
>> ◊comment{} tag in the first item gets treated as its own <li>, and
>> generally the generated markup is a bit weird – at each newline, a blank
>> <li> is generated:
>>
>>
>>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Pollen" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to pollenpub+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
