Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up
Appearance settings

📚 DOCS: Format docs with mdformat-myst #156

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

Open
hukkin wants to merge 4 commits into executablebooks:master
base: master
Choose a base branch
Loading
from hukkin:mdformat-myst

Conversation

@hukkin
Copy link
Contributor

@hukkin hukkin commented Apr 15, 2021

@chrisjsewell not sure if you want this merged, but if nothing else, this is to showcase and let you know that a MyST formatter exists 😉

In addition to auto-formatting the docs, this PR fixes an exclude in pre-commit config (benchmark folder changed to benchmarking) and fixes incorrect list indentation in contributing.md.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 15, 2021
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

Merging #156 (c112fcc) into master (53d9b33) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #156 +/- ##
=======================================
 Coverage 96.10% 96.10% 
=======================================
 Files 60 60 
 Lines 3232 3232 
=======================================
 Hits 3106 3106 
 Misses 126 126 
Flag Coverage Δ
pytests 96.10% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.


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 53d9b33...c112fcc. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Contributor Author

hukkin commented Apr 15, 2021
edited
Loading

RTD build will fail because it has these dependencies

  • myst-parser
  • markdown-it-py == <current-version>, that is since RTD requirements are specified as pip install .[rtd], RTD implicitly has markdown-it-py's current version as dependency

A conflict comes from the fact that myst-parser requires markdown-it-py~=0.6.2, which is incompatible with pip install ..

To fix this, I recommend making RTD not implicitly require the package itself. One solution is to remove the rtd install extra and replace it with docs/requirements.txt.

Copy link
Member

Thanks I'll check it out soonish

But yeh I want RTD to build with the develop version of markdown-it-py.
This is a known issue, but will be less problematic once myst-parser (and jupytext) are pinning to ~1.0 where it should be a good while before a back-incompatible v2

```{toctree}
:maxdepth: 2
---
Copy link
Member

@chrisjsewell chrisjsewell Apr 25, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It would be nice if this did not convert from the short-hand

Copy link
Member

@chrisjsewell chrisjsewell Apr 25, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

but mainly looking good cheers!

Copy link
Contributor Author

@hukkin hukkin Apr 25, 2021
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It would be nice if this did not convert from the short-hand

Hmm, maybe. I couldn't see any crystal clear advantage to using the short-hand, besides maybe being one line less verbose. Always formatting with the frontmatter style has a few advantages:

  • Kills useless debate in PRs about which style to use
  • Removes the chance that you'll ever need to look at a frontmatter style to short-hand style diff (or vice-versa) in a PR --> cleaner diffs, simpler reviews.
  • The syntax makes it more obvious that the content is, in fact, just plain YAML.

but mainly looking good cheers!

🥳

Copy link
Member

@chrisjsewell chrisjsewell Apr 25, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I couldn't see any crystal clear advantage to using the short-hand

Well its more comparable to the RST syntax (to ease migration), but mainly I fear (like the consecutive numbering discussion) it may put users off using mdformat, if it enforces a style they are not used to (a lot of current documentation uses the shorthand), similarly I would envisage it as a flag

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Consecutive numbering was different to me in that that style clearly is better in its own way (more readable, and resembles rendered doc more). I don't currently feel that way about the shorthand syntax.

I definitely understand the point about putting users off, but a) mdformat is an opinionated formatter, not a text passthrough function, and b) users don't pay me so I don't necessarily have to care 😄.

If someone were to contribute a --keep-directive-style flag I'd merge it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@chrisjsewell chrisjsewell chrisjsewell left review comments

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /