-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
Add missing overloads for String#byte_slice
#12809
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
straight-shoota
merged 5 commits into
crystal-lang:master
from
straight-shoota:feature/string-byte_slice-range
Dec 23, 2022
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
397ebd1
Add specs for `String#byte_slice?`
straight-shoota b9def17
Add missing `String#byte_slice?(Int)` overload
straight-shoota 9c8b158
Add imissing `String#byte_slice(Range)` overloads
straight-shoota ccf9a19
Apply suggestions from code review
straight-shoota 0423f4a
Fix docs
straight-shoota File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This and the two calls above actually return
"lo". I don't know why these aren't caught by the routine "fix examples in the docs" PRs(those lines are due to #8447 so they are fairly old)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@maiha Any idea?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The basic premise is that my checkers cannot handle all EXAMPLES.
EXAMPLES that cannot be handled are managed as an "exclusion list" and excluded from testing.
In this case, the entire code block is excluded because the incorrect comment syntax would interfere with the automatic generation of tests.
The following code is generated and fails.
I understand. So how many examples of such exclusions do you have?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Perhaps we could fix a format for such comments on the output value.
My initial idea for this would be to just append another comment:
This should be fairly readable, unambiguous and easy to parse.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's good. I think it is the best choice so far. 💯
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@straight-shoota
I would like to inspect the excluded EXAMPLES like this one once again.
There are probably about 300 cases, and it takes about a week.
I smell a 1.7 release, will it be ready in time?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There should be time. 1.7.0 is scheduled for January 6.