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

Support extra args to tesseract #16

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Aug 3, 2022
Merged

Conversation

timholy
Copy link
Collaborator

@timholy timholy commented Aug 1, 2022

This allows one to pass additional command-line arguments to tesseract.
This makes it possible to exploit more of its functionality.

For example, in applications where layout is meaningful (e.g., screenshots),
retrieving the full TSV can be very useful.

This allows one to pass additional command-line arguments to tesseract.
This makes it possible to exploit more of its functionality.
@leferrad leferrad self-requested a review August 2, 2022 03:18
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 2, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #16 (d9fe231) into master (709e427) will decrease coverage by 0.07%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #16      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   96.07%   96.00%   -0.08%     
==========================================
  Files           1        1              
  Lines          51       50       -1     
==========================================
- Hits           49       48       -1     
  Misses          2        2              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/tesseract.jl 96.00% <100.00%> (-0.08%) ⬇️

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

@leferrad
Copy link
Owner

leferrad commented Aug 2, 2022

Thanks for your contribution @timholy! This is definitely a needed improvement to allow better usability 🙌

Give me a couple of days to check the changes better through a code review, also to understand why CI is failing for the nightly version. Once everything is OK we can merge and release a new version of the package.

Copy link
Owner

@leferrad leferrad left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM! Just a couple of suggestions / questions, then we are ok to approve 👌

src/tesseract.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/tesseract.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
test/test_tesseract.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
timholy and others added 2 commits August 3, 2022 00:35
Co-authored-by: Leandro Ferrado <leferrad@gmail.com>
Copy link
Owner

@leferrad leferrad left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LTGM! CI is not working but for compatibility with the nightly version, which is out of the scope of this PR. So we can merge this, and then I proceed to prepare the release. Thanks again @timholy !

@leferrad leferrad merged commit 2845123 into leferrad:master Aug 3, 2022
@leferrad leferrad mentioned this pull request Aug 3, 2022
@timholy timholy deleted the teh/extraargs branch August 4, 2022 14:24
@timholy
Copy link
Collaborator Author

timholy commented Aug 4, 2022

You surely noticed this, but the failure is ultimately due to SimpleMocking's use of Cassette. Cassette dives deep into Julia internals and is difficult to keep in working order, since the internal representation of code is deliberately not covered by the compatibility guarantee. To the extent that the failure bothers you, you could omit the mocking tests on Julia nightly?

@leferrad
Copy link
Owner

leferrad commented Aug 4, 2022

@timholy given I don't have the best solution in mind, I've created #21 to track this issue in order to figure out what to do.

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 this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants