You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Almost all markdown viewers/renderers allow for the use of "1. " to denote a numbered list. so instead of
1. item1
2. item2
3. item3
one can write
1. item1
1. item2
1. item3
which will then renders as:
1. item1
2. item2
3. item3
Examples that implement this behavior are sphinx / readthedocs, github, emacs markdown preview, etc. I strongly prefer this option since when people reshuffle their ordered lists, and they don't have a nice editor, they can't make mistakes.
I looked at the code of markdown-insert-list-item and on line 6040 is the relevant part:
changing the check just for old-prefix and adding a check for a configuration option that could be named: markdown-ordered-list-item-prefix-enumeration (default t, and when nil doesn't enumerate, but always inserts "1. ") would be exactly the behavior I am looking for.
Would this be acceptable?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Almost all markdown viewers/renderers allow for the use of "1. " to denote a numbered list. so instead of
one can write
which will then renders as:
Examples that implement this behavior are sphinx / readthedocs, github, emacs markdown preview, etc. I strongly prefer this option since when people reshuffle their ordered lists, and they don't have a nice editor, they can't make mistakes.
I looked at the code of
markdown-insert-list-item
and on line6040
is the relevant part:changing the check just for
old-prefix
and adding a check for a configuration option that could be named:markdown-ordered-list-item-prefix-enumeration
(defaultt
, and whennil
doesn't enumerate, but always inserts "1. ") would be exactly the behavior I am looking for.Would this be acceptable?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: