Test for #1218 & "marked" spec

[joshbruce]

Marked version: 0.3.19

Markdown flavor: GitHub Flavored Markdown

Description

Adds test case defining the behavior mentioned in #1218 to ensure we have a test case for it. After looking at the specs, the question does stand, I think, on what the desired output should be when using GFM.

Note: This PR does not submit a solution; only adds to the growing test bed.

Expectation

<p><code>someone@example.com</code></p>

Result

<p><a href="mailto:%60someone@example.com">`someone@example.com</a>`</p>

What was attempted

`someone@example.com`

Contributor

• Test(s) exist to ensure functionality and minimize regression (if no tests added, list tests covering this PR); or,
• no tests required for this PR.
• If submitting new feature, it has been documented in the appropriate places.

Committer

In most cases, this should be a different person than the contributor.

• Draft GitHub release notes have been updated.
• CI is green (no forced merge required).
• Merge PR

[UziTech]

Could we move all of the original tests here?

[joshbruce]

@UziTech: Great minds. Once we get this merged in I was going to go ahead and start putting that PR together. One that takes into account that we are doing the CM and GFM comparison separately while trying to maintain backward compatibility awareness.

[UziTech]

In the next PR when moving the original tests here we should also move the Messenger class to a separate file so we don't have to maintain an implementation in every spec test file

[joshbruce]

To @UziTech's point, I will see what I can do to put messenger somewhere else...maybe set the options in the spec and have messenger just use whatever is there. Thinking I'll put it in the root of the spec directory - gives me a chance to rename it.