Forgot to set multiline_para to False

[Igoranze]

Hey @ikirudennis,

I am sorry for the inconvenience yet again. The multiline_para boolean that I added before needs to be closed if block.tag == 'p' is not true. Because we want to render multiline codeblock after a multiline p..

I added a test that has multiple multiline codeblocks and multiple multiline paragraphs and checked that the output is verified against txstyle.org/textile.

Added a small piece of code that sets the boolean to False if block.tag is nog p. because we only need it to work for multiline, it does not matter for single p.

Thanks a bunch!

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 100.0% when pulling 6ce46ad on Igoranze:master into 51cbf11 on textile:master.

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #63 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 100%.

@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##           master    #63   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage     100%   100%           
=====================================
  Files          12     12           
  Lines        1211   1213    +2     
  Branches      225    226    +1     
=====================================
+ Hits         1211   1213    +2

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
textile/core.py	100% <100%> (ø)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 51cbf11...6ce46ad. Read the comment docs.

[ikirudennis]

Firstly, you are not at all an inconvenience. Finding a bug, submitting a solution with tests and maintaining 100% coverage is actually very convenient. Thank you very much, I really appreciate your contributions.

I'll release this soon. One small thing I didn't notice until now is that the names of the tests are slightly incorrect. In the github tests, I assign the test name the same number as the issue it references. I'll change the names myself, just thought I'd mention it in case you notice it when I release it.

Once again, thank you very much @Igoranze!