Make the formatter smarter about mutli-line steps#596
Merged
Conversation
michaelficarra
approved these changes
Jun 7, 2024
Member
michaelficarra
left a comment
michaelficarra
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm gonna take your word for it.
Member
|
This seems related to #513 (and possibly tc39/ecmarkdown#94 ), but I'm not sure to what extent. |
Member
Author
|
@gibson042 This is only about the text representation, not the output. Though of course you need the text representation to be preserved by the formatter if you're going to use it to guide the output. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Some consumers write some steps across multiple line of source, like this. This makes the formatter smarter in those cases: rather than making all lines be the same indentation, it keeps whatever indentation there is beyond that which is common across all lines.
I would have been happier making it aware of Records explicitly, but that's quite complex: the expression parser intentionally doesn't represent
<del>etc, which means its output is not suitable for use in the formatter.