Re: markup->string

[Kevin Barry]

On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 02:49:55PM +0100, Jean Abou Samra wrote:
> Le 15/11/2022 à 14:43, David Kastrup a écrit :
> > If it's "mundane", why would the conversion result in a complex
> > replacement?
> 
> Have you looked at the replacement?
> 
> It is
> 
> (lambda* (m #:optional headers)
>   (if headers
>       (markup->string m #:props (headers-property-alist-chain headers))
>       (markup->string m))

I agree with others' assessment that this doesn't "look" good: it's
taking logic that, in a perfect world, would be internal to convert-ly,
and inserting it into users' documents. We wouldn't advise users to
write this logical check in a new score. We would tell them only to use
whichever of the two options applies to their use.

> The "complexity" we are talking about is the length of the output
> of convert-ly relative to the input. There is no complex logic
> at all.

Well yes, but for many users it would be replacing something short or
simple with something they are not familiar with.

The merge request you raised to address it looks good (especially
because it only warns for anything more complex than
`(markup->string <symbol>)`

Kevin