Skip to content
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

Code formatting and code consistency review #29

Closed
ruebot opened this issue Nov 21, 2019 · 3 comments · Fixed by #42
Closed

Code formatting and code consistency review #29

ruebot opened this issue Nov 21, 2019 · 3 comments · Fixed by #42
Assignees

Comments

@ruebot
Copy link
Member

ruebot commented Nov 21, 2019

We should go through all the examples in current and make sure all the formatting is consistent; consistent variable naming, examples inputs/outputs, and indentation.

@lintool @ianmilligan1 @SamFritz let me know if there is anything else here we should flag.

@ruebot ruebot self-assigned this Nov 21, 2019
@ruebot ruebot changed the title Code formatting consistenting review Code formatting and code consistency review Nov 22, 2019
@ianmilligan1
Copy link
Member

I think throughout maybe just making it a straightforward call to example.arc.gz which they can curl down. We've got a mixture of example.arc.gz, example.warc.gz and then path to the example files in the AUT repo. Not sure how best to highlight the curling of example.arc.gz given our new doc structure tho.

@ruebot
Copy link
Member Author

ruebot commented Nov 22, 2019

Not all of the examples will work on the example.arc.gz or example.warc.gz files that are in src/test. My thinking here is that it should just be /path/to/web/archives/.

@ianmilligan1
Copy link
Member

Yeah I can see pros and cons for both (cut-and-paste works out of the box to see sample output on the former; but how often will people really be testing stuff out on the tiny example (W)ARC... 🤔

ruebot added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 4, 2020
ianmilligan1 pushed a commit that referenced this issue Feb 5, 2020
* Code formatting and code consistency review.

- Resolves #29

* review
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants