Would you consider exposing a more structured error type? about markdown-rs HOT 8 OPEN

Ah right got it. Thanks for the pointers. The JS parser may make things a bit more complicated I guess if you want to support arbitrary errors - String kind of make sense there.

I'll start with parsing the errors myself for now. Happy to report back later how that goes.

Thanks again!

from markdown-rs.

Welcome @begleynk!
Thanks for sharing your idea!

To preface, markdown-rs and the closely related unified js ecosystem, follow a variation on the Unix philosophy:

• Write programs that do one thing and do it well.
• Write programs to work together.
• Write programs to handle text streams Syntax Trees, because that is a universal interface.

This module focuses on parsing valid markdown and mdx prioritizing (in order): following the CommonMark and MDX standards, being extensible to support many different use cases, and being fast and efficient.

To answer your questions:

• Is there interest in more authoring experience tools to offer localized and descriptive recommendations? Yes! Packages are welcome to wrap markdown-rs with this functionality
• Should that functionality live in the core parser package? No, the weight of a second parser to guess at intent and localizing messages goes outside the scope of markdown-rs. They would be a better fit for another module, likely a language server module like https://github.com/mdx-js/mdx-analyzer

from markdown-rs.

Thanks for the details!

Just to clarify - I agree that putting the rendering logic for the specific kind of error messages I want to show doesn't belong into markdown-rs.

What I'm really asking about is if you'd be interested in changing the return type for this function (and the _html equivalent) from Result<Node, String> to a more structured Result<Node, Error>, where the Error type would have more details about the error.

Right now the information about where exactly the error came from becomes harder to gather programmatically since it's a String,

Then the user would be able to customize the error presentation, wrapping the library for their own use case, and you could still have the Display implementation to give the current error message.

Does that make sense?

from markdown-rs.

to a more structured Result<Node, Error>, where the Error type would have more details about the error.

The string is already pretty structured, line, column, reason. What more do you need?

I think you should already be able to do what you want with that info. Perhaps it can be a “prettier” result, but what can be done with errors should be the same?

The reason I started simple is that this project is no_std + alloc, so it’s very minimal. And errors don’t exist in markdown itself, only in MDX.
So pulling in a more complex project for errors will be unused by many users.

from markdown-rs.

The string is already pretty structured, line, column, reason. What more do you need?

I was hoping that e.g. get the starting position of the offending tag directly for the purpose of creating the custom error I described above. A workaround is using regex to pull them out of the error string.

I'm happy to go with that workaround for now if you feel there isn't much use for this outside our admittedly niche use case.

We just wanted to customize the error quite heavily so we were hoping to do this without resorting to regex, and figured this may be something others would be interested in.

Really impressed with the library. Thank you for creating and maintaining it ❤️

from markdown-rs.

<3

Well, you don’t need regex, this whole project doesn’t, should be a relatively small parse ;)

What info would you want? Is there more you’d want? Is a small struct with a point and reason enough?

from markdown-rs.

Well, you don’t need regex, this whole project doesn’t, should be a relatively small parse ;)

Fair point ;) And there's only 6 distinct error messages by my count in to_mdast.rs, so it's not a lot of work.

What info would you want? Is there more you’d want? Is a small struct with a point and reason enough?

That would be amazing. If possible it would be super useful to also have the end point of the tag being referenced, not just the start. But a brief glance at the code shows that info might not be available where those errors are generated?

Also some errors also reference two different tags (i.e. the open and close tag) - it would be great to have positions of both (hence my suggestion for the enum to describe the different cases).

But feel free to close this issue, unless you feel there's value in keeping it around.

from markdown-rs.

There are also errors thrown from the JavaScript parser that is passed in. As that parser is arbitrary, those errors are also arbitrary.
to_mdast is one part, there are also many “parse errors”, see for example

I’m open to a PR that uses a simple structure, reason and point.
If and when you work then you can investigate whether positions, and actually two positions, makes sense. I think it’s only very few cases where that info exists.

from markdown-rs.