Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

Version 1 Next »

Following table shows and overview of pros and cons in relation to RST and Markdown mark up languages, based on features, syntax, complexity, maintainability, and community.

reStructedText (RST)

Markdown (MyST)

Features

  • Built in support for extensibility

  • Supports re-usable content

  • Automatic generation and updating of table of contents

  • Supports advanced tables

  • No out-of-the-box support for re-usable content

  • Supports simple tables

Syntax and complexity

  • Complex syntax that can be hard to read

  • Previewing requires extra setup in VS Code

  • More widely supported than RST

  • Third-party extensions, if required for extra features, poses a risk if they are abandoned in the future

  • Harder to maintain large projects as re-usable content is not supported

  • Easy to onboard or hand-over to other developers as most developers know markdown

Maintainability

  • Re-usable content makes it easy to maintain and update several pages at once

  • Less need for third-party extensions reduces risk of incompatibility due to abandoned extensions

  • Supports directives and roles

  • More widely supported than RST

  • Third-party extensions, if required for extra features, poses a risk if they are abandoned in the future

  • Harder to maintain large projects as re-usable content is not supported

  • Easy to onboard or hand-over to other developers as most developers know markdown

Community support

  • Small community

  • Small community means issues are solved slower and new features takes longer to be tested and implemented

  • Large community

  • Due to large community, issues are solved quickly

  • No labels