anchor.diff:  
   This is a `literal` without internal passthru. Thus it does not `contain *bold* or _italic_ or ``quotes'' inside itself, and if it includes replacements like (C) or -- or &#x278a; that would be a bug`. It does not take an attribute list either, as we see [here]`like this`. Other styles of passthru are +++<somexml>this</somexml>+++ and $$<morexml>this</morexml>$$. Also there is a pass macro which I treat as a special case pass:none[<like>this</like>]
   
  +`A literal line.`
  +
   This is a ``double quoted string'' of the normal type and this is``n't''. What happens in the second case is that AsciiDoc sees a single quoted string with an extra backtick on one side and an extra apostrophe on the other side. But that feels like a bug to me. I don't code for it. Do not taunt happy fun ball.
   
  +``A double quoted string line.''
  +
   This is a [list]`single quoted string, isn't it?' of the normal type. But I have not coded for this; I don't use them (I use explicit curly quotes instead).
   
   You can get a messy situation: ```Like this.''' AsciiDoc deals badly with that. That is another reason why I tend to use literal curly single quotes.
   
   There is also [list]#unquoted# text (which can occur in mid[list]##wo##rd). As you can see they are useful with attribute lists.
  +
  +#An unquoted line.#
   
   This is +literal with a ``quoted'' string+. This is *bold with a ``quoted'' string*. This is _italic with a ``quoted'' string_. This is a ``quoted string containing +literal+ and *bold* and _italic_ inside it.''
   
  
positive.code: 
  This _is italic_ and this is_n't_. But this (_is_). This is __too_ because the second is inside.
  
  This *is bold* and this is*n't*. But this (,*is*). This is **too* because the second is inside.
  
  This is _italic containing *bold* text_, while this is *bold text containing _italic_ text*.
  
  This +is literal+ and this is+n't+.
  
  This is +literal #containing# *bold* text+ and this is +literal containing _italic_ text+.
  
negative.code:   'DocBook - The Definitive Guide'. O'Reilly & Associates.
    1999. ISBN 1-56592-580-7.
  
  Three square brackets make a bibliography anchor. (I'm getting a false positive on the ``1999'' in the previous paragraph, as if it were a numbered list. But I don't care! And in fact AsciiDoc itself, when rendering, is giving exactly the same false positive.)
  
  A footnote footnote:[An example footnote.]. It is just a form of macro. I don't use them.
  // Note to self: use them. (By the way, this is a comment.)
  // This is another comment. Next line is an empty comment.
  //
  testing
  // Comment.
  
  I do use ((indexes)), though.(((index term)))
  
  