Answer prose round 1: a true validity premise, the reading in two plain sentences, and the braces named one by one
This commit is contained in:
+5
-5
@@ -850,9 +850,9 @@ the README's Format string section states. The maintainer ruled the escape impli
|
||||
goal: doubled braces and a lone `}` belong to the `{…}` syntax, so the goal names no escape and
|
||||
a lone `}` stays an error. Valid while a template escapes a brace by doubling it.
|
||||
|
||||
## Goal 7.2's "no escaping" means a template needs no special character beyond `{}`
|
||||
## Goal 7.2's "no escaping" means a template needs no special character beyond `{` and `}`
|
||||
|
||||
2026-10-05, Lilleman auf Larv. Serves goal 7.2: your first template of your own needs no
|
||||
escaping and no options. The maintainer reads it as a template being writable with no special
|
||||
character other than the braces, so a literal brace written `{{` or `}}` keeps the goal. Valid
|
||||
while a template's only special characters are its braces.
|
||||
2026-10-05, Lilleman auf Larv. Serves goal 7.2. The maintainer reads "no escaping" as: a
|
||||
template can be written with no special character other than `{` and `}`. A literal brace
|
||||
written `{{` or `}}` therefore meets the goal. Valid while `{` and `}` are the only
|
||||
characters with a meaning outside a `{…}` token.
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user