Use and document default numerical formatting #191
Conversation
Run `format()` before starting tests. This ensures docs match the out-of-the-box formatting that users see. By actively calling `format`, we ensure consistency for developers who may have custom formatting in their config files. A downside is that we overwrite user's custom formatting. Partially fixes #183.
|
Thank you! Perhaps @mtmiller can advise on the Unfortunately I don't have MATLAB available currently, otherwise I would be happy to run the tests. |
That is only because of function scope, |
inst/doctest.m
Outdated
| @@ -285,12 +310,35 @@ | |||
| summary.num_tests = 0; | |||
| summary.num_tests_passed = 0; | |||
|
|
|||
| % stash user's formatting | |||
| if (is_octave) | |||
| if (compare_versions(OCTAVE_VERSION(), '4.3.0', '>=')) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Recommend changing this to 4.4.0, 4.3.0 was a development version, shouldn't exist anywhere now
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wouldn't it still be more logical to test for 4.3.0 since the "old" way of doing it will fail there (if I understand gnu-octave/symbolic#713 (comment) right)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IIRC, there are probably some range of commits where neither works...
People running old dev versions get to keep both pieces :-)
Or we could bump our min version to 4.4 and simplify this...?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I added a try-catch version with no version testing: personally I'm not a fan is this kind of laisez-faire Python-esque code, but it does satisfy both your comments :)
|
I forgot to mention a potential downside of this: projects cannot write all their docs using e.g., But I don't know of any project doing that so I don't think we should worry... Ok to merge? |
|
I've now tested on Matlab, I'll merge now. |
No description provided.