Fix middle-word-em extra preventing strongs from being recognized (#606)
#607
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
No point doing anything to the text if MWE's allowed. The extra's only purpose is to protect MWE's
|
LGTM thanks! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR fixes #606 by altering the regex used in
middle-word-emso that it doesn't match against intentional emphasis markers.Previously, a snippet such as
**one_two_three**would have been matched aside from the last character. This is due to the old regex matching emphasis markers without any regard for whether they areem(single) orstrong(double).The new regex will only match markers that aren't preceded or followed by a similar marker