Make measurement and length parser more strict#2260
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Closes #2258
Accepting random amounts of garbage input after a successful match and calling it good might not have created any problems in most cases, but it does hoist the burden of validation on the end user when we could just as easily be verifying them.
This might cause errors in existing documents, but the input would also be legitimately bogus and should be expected to fail since the input may actually be incorrectly parsed. Just because we accepted
1ez minus 4pt plus 1gembefore and silently made it into a length doesn't mean we did it right. The user should be expected to fix the units and order until it parses successfully, e.g. perhaps they meant1em plus 4pt minus 1em(or maybe they meant en?).