Flaws in the BBCode 1.0 specification

I have noticed that people use [sub] where something like [small] was meant. The Shiichan implementation of BBCode 1.0 doesn't cover [small], which is kind of annoying.

We should design the 1.1 specs, since this effort looks like abandoned^[1]. Post all your proposals here. Particularly, IIRC, someone requested some LISP-like features. A formal description of such improvement would be nice.

^[1] http://wakaba.c3.cx/shii/

True. Since OP is already in classes, it's going to be kind of a crunch, but OP needs to play with this shit a lot rather than just doing school work as assigned (also important, of course). CS people are lucky enough to be able to do this, since computers are everywhere and compilers are free. You've got professional facilites available to you. Just imagine needing to purchase thousands of dollars of equipment before you could write a proper program. That's how it is in most fields. You CS kids don't know how good you have it.
 
OP, I want to see you reading at least one CS paper per week, and learning every living language you hear about well enough to read it. You can study the history of programming in your spare time. If you care about being successful in the field (not just grinding out programs that work often enough to get okayed for deployment, but writing good programs), this is what you'll be doing.
 
You have no idea how often I'm talking to a CS major and find myself delivering a lecture rather than having a discussion. You and your peers are fucking clueless, and it's all your fault for not reading and not practicing, and above all, not knowing how to consult documentation.

>>2
Hey, I wrote this. /prog/ is such a circle-jerk.

>>3
This might surprise you, but I invented circle-jerks. Then turned it in an unforced, highly successful meme.

>>2
Is that even relevant to the topic, or is it just your way of saying ``I don't care about BBCode''

iirc the shiitchan software already uses an external library for bbcode, if a spec is written i can write a replacement as an implementation of BBCode 1.1.

>>6
BBCode has long since transcended mere specifications -- it is a living beast with the power to transmute its functionality into anything it pleases.

Why oh why does lisp seem so much better?
(lambda (expert x) (u (i (b (o x)))))
(expert 'EXPERT 'PROGRAMMER)

This can't be interpreted at server side, so imagine a javascript interpreter that translates your lispus to whatever format shii-chan finds friendly.

Actually, yes. That's what anon should do. Write a lisp-to-bbcode javascript interpreter that provides all the tags as functions:
b, u, i, o, etc
and lambda. That would be so awesome. Then we get moot to use it, in all boards or just /prog/. Or we use a de facto greasemonkey script.
I'd do it but I absolutely hate javascript.

>>8
dammit, I saged

penis

>>10
*grabs*

*Writes the Revised Report on BBCode*

>>8
I think that you are dropping some of the flexibility that BBCode provides. Try, for example, to write the following with your lithp:

[b][i][u][sub][code]BB[/sub]^Code[/u][/i][/b][/code]

Which should (if it's not a failure) render as:
BBCode

>>13
Lol'd at [/code]. Here goes backslash-escaped

[b][i][u][sub][code]BB[/code][/sub][o][rem]LISP[/rem][sup][code]Code[/code][/sup][/o][/u][/i][/b]

NESTED!  NESTED TAGS ARE THE STANDARD!!^!!!!

BBCode

BBCode

BBCode

^_BBCode

>>16-19
First time you see expert bbcode, eh?

>>20
First time you post outside of Canada, eh?

>>21
Not everything is america, idort. I'm from fucking europe. >>21 is a murderer, etc.

>>22
Actually I'm a haxer, and I think I don't have to tell you what my next target is^...

hax
my
anus

testing
my
anus

testing
^B_BCODE
OPTIMISATION