response

1 files changed, 30 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/doc/bugs/wiki_links_still_processed_inside_code_blocks.mdwn b/doc/bugs/wiki_links_still_processed_inside_code_blocks.mdwn
index 881cf96a4..de9f6e5db 100644
--- a/doc/bugs/wiki_links_still_processed_inside_code_blocks.mdwn
+++ b/doc/bugs/wiki_links_still_processed_inside_code_blocks.mdwn
@@ -1,4 +1,8 @@
-In [[markdown]] syntax, none of the other special characters get processed inside a code block.  However, in ikiwiki, [[wiki links|wikilink]] and [[preprocessor directives|preprocessordirective]] still get processed inside a code block, requiring additional escaping.  For example, `[links don't work](#here)`, but `a [[wikilink]] becomes HTML`. --[[JoshTriplett]]
+In [[markdown]] syntax, none of the other special characters get processed
+inside a code block.  However, in ikiwiki, [[wiki links|wikilink]] and
+[[preprocessor directives|preprocessordirective]] still get processed
+inside a code block, requiring additional escaping.  For example, `[links
+don't work](#here)`, but `a [[wikilink]] becomes HTML`. --[[JoshTriplett]]
 
 Indented lines provide a good way to escape a block of text containing
 markdown syntax, but ikiwiki links like \[[this]] are still
@@ -12,3 +16,28 @@ and have it render like:
 	\[[this]]
 
 --[[cworth]]
+
+----
+
+> Has there been any progress or ideas on this bug recently?  I use an
+> expanded CamelCase regexp, and without much escaping in freelink text, or
+> url links, or in codeblocks I get IkiWiki's attempt at creating a "link
+> within a link".
+>
+> I have no ideas other than perhaps once IkiWiki encounters \[\[ or the
+> position is reset with a backreference from a CamelCased word, further
+> processing of wikilinks is disabled until the position is reset and a "no
+> not makelinks" flag or variable is cleared.
+>
+> I've come up with some _really_ ugly workarounds to handle case specific
+> stuff like codeblocks but the problem creeps up again and again in
+> unexpected places.  I'd be happy to come up with a patch if anyone has a
+> bright idea on a nice clean way (_in theroy_) to fix this.  I'm out of ideas.
+>
+> --CharlesMauch
+
+> I've moved the above comment here because it seems to be talking about
+> this bug, not the similar Smileys bug.
+> 
+> In the case of either bug, no, I don't have an idea of a solution yet.
+> --[[Joey]]