Add missing explanatory comment in ForStatement case #748
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jlongster
reviewed
Feb 20, 2017
| @@ -989,6 +989,7 @@ function genericPrintNoParens(path, options, print) { | |||
| case "ForStatement": { | |||
| const body = adjustClause(path.call(print, "body"), options); | |||
|
|
|||
| // We want to keep dangling comments above the loop to stay consistent. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think explaining what comment is dangling is helpful (I'm not even sure why this comment was classified as dangling). Can you say something about the comment being between the for statement and the parentheses?
|
@jlongster does it meet your expectations now? |
|
Perfect, thanks! |
yamafaktory
deleted the
697-fix-missing-dangling-comments-for-loop-add-comment
branch
lock
bot
added
the
locked-due-to-inactivity
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
@jlongster here comes the PR for the missing comment, as requested in #742 (comment).