[IMP] test/rst_style, Makefile: add optional review checkers

[samueljlieber]

This PR improves the functionality of the Makefile by adding the review target as well as adding an optional rst_style check for detecting early line breaks.

The make review target enables all the optional checks to be ran, prompting the user for a path and maximum line length.

task-2801043

[robodoo]

Pull request status dashboard.

[StraubCreative]

Approving after discussion and seeing a demo.
I think this is a really great add to our test kit.

Passing to @doc-review for a more thorough look.
Thanks in advance @AntoineVDV @Feyensv 🙏

[AntoineVDV]

Hello, I pushed a review commit that you can squash if you're okay with it.

Some parts of the logic for "early breaks" are far-fetched, IMHO, so I didn't bother rewriting them and only reformatted+refactored what I could:

• added 100 as the default value for the line length;
• (re-)wrote some comments to explain better what make review is about;
• renamed a few variables and functions;
• simplified is_valid_line;
• fixed the yield suggesting the wrong target line.

Otherwise, it seems to work overall, even though some false positives remain.

@robodoo delegate+

[samueljlieber]

Hi @AntoineVDV thank you for the improvements, I made two small corrections in 455e770:

1. the $ added at the end of the REGEX was causing many of the false positives, removing this character stopped the false positives from my testing.
2. I believe the yield suggesting the target line number was correct:
   
   

I can squash and merge with your 👍 – thank you! 🙏

[AntoineVDV]

Hi @AntoineVDV thank you for the improvements, I made two small corrections in 455e770:

1. the $ added at the end of the REGEX was causing many of the false positives, removing this character stopped the false positives from my testing.
2. I believe the yield suggesting the target line number was correct:
   
   

I can squash and merge with your +1 – thank you! pray

Oh yes, indeed. I updated the lno after adding the $ (because it's usually good practice to accommodate the code to a regex ending with $, and not the other way around, but it's fine here) to the regex, which spans several lines, hence why it looked wrong to me.

I will squash and r+ now so we can rebase #4870 today :)

[AntoineVDV]

@robodoo r+