Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Aug 7, 2023. It is now read-only.

Rewrite #11

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Aug 6, 2015
Merged

Rewrite #11

merged 5 commits into from
Aug 6, 2015

Conversation

jschroeder9000
Copy link
Member

Closes #2.
Closes #7.
Closes #8.
Closes #9.

@steelbrain steelbrain self-assigned this Aug 6, 2015
fse = require 'fs-extra'
path = require 'path'
temp = require 'temp'
XRegExp = require('xregexp').XRegExp

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please use the helper module for parsing instead of using xregexp directly

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Wow, you're fast. :)

My biggest reason for not using the helper module for parsing is that is not able to take into account indenting and ends up underlining all the leading whitespace. My parsing uses the textEditor object to get the indentation level so it can be taken into account (a trick I picked up from linter-coffeelint). Is there some way to have the best of both worlds?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks like that was added after I wrote this (and will require a version bump in the dependencies). I will work on refactoring this to use the helper module.

@steelbrain
Copy link

I see that you have implemented your own method of temp and copy, I would suggest you wait a bit until we add this to the helper module, see steelbrain/atom-linter#30

@jschroeder9000
Copy link
Member Author

Given that Linter has removed the legacy API and this package is currently broken, I feel a bit of haste to get a working version published. I have subscribed to that issue and can incorporate it in a future version if there is not a pressing need for that to block release.

@Arcanemagus
Copy link
Member

My vote would be to go with a working version ASAP to get people able to use this again, with a better/cleaner version pushed out when that is ready.

@jschroeder9000
Copy link
Member Author

I agree. Something imperfect but working is far better than something that is broken. I think the best course of action is to publish this as-is and create new issues for the proposed improvements.

@steelbrain
Copy link

You guys have my vote! 👍

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants