Shrimple – A Simpler, Nicer Markdown • Hacker News Board

Re: Shrimple – A Simpler, Nicer Markdown

#31

Post by IshKebab » Mon, Jul 06, 2026, 8:02 AM UTC

ser0 wrote: post #5

How does this compare to RST, which also claims to solve specific MD inconveniences? In researching for this reply I see that it's joining a somewhat crowded field https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_document_markup_...

RST is pretty much the worst option out there. Your mainstream options are:

* Markdown. Great for simple stuff. It's going to be awkward if you're writing a book or technical docs or whatever.

* RestructuredText. Better for more complex documents but the Python code that drives it is abysmal and it's less popular than Asciidoc so there's really no reason to use this.

* Asciidoc. Definitely a step up from RST but it does have syntax weirdnesses, and the way parsing is done is a messy pile of hacks. Also Asciidoctor is written in Ruby which makes it horrible to work with. But tbh still better than RST due to the low quality of their Python code & docs.

* Typst. Definitely the best option for complex stuff except that its HTML output support is still experimental. You can make it work nicely with some fiddling and custom CSS though.

Overall Markdown and Asciidoc are the best options today, or Typst instead of Asciidoc if you are forward-looking.

This thing just looks like a slight tweak on Markdown which is completely pointless compared to the pain of .. you know, not being supported by any other tools at all.

Re: Shrimple – A Simpler, Nicer Markdown

#32

Post by xigoi » Mon, Jul 06, 2026, 8:24 AM UTC

SwellJoe wrote: post #2

Indent for code blocks is a non-starter. Can't paste easily, very annoying to type in a web form. Triple backticks is the right thing.

That said, I think it would be better if the closing delimiter was different from the opening one. Yesterday I had an LLM output text where it forgot one of the delimiters, causing all text inside code blocks to actually be outside and vice-versa.

Re: Shrimple – A Simpler, Nicer Markdown

#33

Post by gritzko » Mon, Jul 06, 2026, 8:34 AM UTC

orthoxerox wrote: post #28

gritzko wrote: post #18

About five years ago I faced the fact no two Markdown implementations are fully compatible. I made StrictMark[1], which is a backwards-compatible Markdown dialect with a formal grammar (I use Ragel for parser generation btw). Takes 5-10 min with LLMs to make any implementation, cause formal grammar is unchanged. I use it, no one else does, which is not an issue cause it is backwards-compatible. GitHub renders it fine…

How does it compare to CommonMark, which I think was the first formally specified Markdown dialect?

CommonMark spec[1] is laaarge and not formal (no grammar). StrictMark has block-level[2] and inline[3] grammars, 100+ and 200+ lines of Ragel code respectively. May parse with regexes too, and results will be identical.

[1]: https://spec.commonmark.org/0.31.2/

[2]: https://github.com/gritzko/beagle/blob/main/dog/tok/MKDTB.c....

[3]: https://github.com/gritzko/beagle/blob/main/dog/tok/MKDT.c.r...

Re: Shrimple – A Simpler, Nicer Markdown

#34

Post by ricardobeat » Mon, Jul 06, 2026, 8:53 AM UTC

LunicLynx wrote: post #26

Having the dashes to make something a headline on another row disconnects meaning. You now have to edit two lines to make one change. Same for the code part. This might be easier to read but it’s not simpler.

Markdown itself introduced that syntax. Though it’s not used nearly as much as it was initially, it’s one of the main features that make it very readable in plain text.

Re: Shrimple – A Simpler, Nicer Markdown

#35

Post by genzer » Mon, Jul 06, 2026, 10:42 AM UTC

Using `-> Title.[1]` for Links looks neat at first. But I often tend to copy links from one Markdown to another. I don't think updating the footnote numbers of *both* Shrimple documents is easier in any way.

Re: Shrimple – A Simpler, Nicer Markdown

#36

Post by WaalkTheEaarth » Mon, Jul 06, 2026, 12:57 PM UTC

why are we reinventing the wheel? markdown works fine.

Re: Shrimple – A Simpler, Nicer Markdown

#37

Post by arunix » Mon, Jul 06, 2026, 3:31 PM UTC

IshKebab wrote: post #31

ser0 wrote: post #5

How does this compare to RST, which also claims to solve specific MD inconveniences? In researching for this reply I see that it's joining a somewhat crowded field https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_document_markup_...

RST is pretty much the worst option out there. Your mainstream options are: * Markdown. Great for simple stuff. It's going to be awkward if you're writing a book or technical docs or whatever. * RestructuredText. Better for more complex documents but the Python code that drives it is abysmal and it's less popular than Asciidoc so there's really no reason to use this. * Asciidoc. Definitely a step up from RST but it d…

Why does Ruby make Asciidoctor horrible to work with?

Re: Shrimple – A Simpler, Nicer Markdown

#38

Post by flufluflufluffy » Mon, Jul 06, 2026, 3:35 PM UTC

Even if this was simpler and better than markdown, I’d purposefully avoid using it because I hate the name so much. A good rule of thumb I just though of: Do not introduce seafood into your branding if you are not a seafood vendor.

Re: Shrimple – A Simpler, Nicer Markdown

#39

Post by aogaili » Tue, Jul 07, 2026, 4:05 AM UTC

SwellJoe wrote: post #9

aogaili wrote: post #3

Leave markdown alone. Focus on JS frameworks and harnesses please.

Ah,yes, the world cries out for more JavaScript frameworks.

Indeed

Re: Shrimple – A Simpler, Nicer Markdown

#40

Post by matltc » Tue, Jul 07, 2026, 5:00 AM UTC

I thought about writing a markdown variant that is easier to type--every token in grammar should be easily reachable from home row and should not require more than one keypress (e.g. no #). I figured same conclusion as many in comments here: no need to reinvent the wheel. Plus, the aggregate amount of time it'd save me from typing may not exceed the time it would take to implement.