-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 76
fix: false negative on shortcut type ref in no-missing-label-refs
#406
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
Draft
lumirlumir
wants to merge
12
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
fix-false-neg-on-shortcut-type-ref-in-no-missing-label-refs
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Draft
fix: false negative on shortcut type ref in no-missing-label-refs
#406
lumirlumir
wants to merge
12
commits into
main
from
fix-false-neg-on-shortcut-type-ref-in-no-missing-label-refs
+860
−38
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
I’ll take a look at this PR within the next two weeks, as I currently have some higher-priority PRs in progress. |
Hi everyone, it looks like we lost track of this pull request. Please review and see what the next steps are. This pull request will auto-close in 7 days without an update. |
…lse-neg-on-shortcut-type-ref-in-no-missing-label-refs
This has been merged now. |
…lse-neg-on-shortcut-type-ref-in-no-missing-label-refs
…lse-neg-on-shortcut-type-ref-in-no-missing-label-refs
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Prerequisites checklist
What is the purpose of this pull request?
Which language are you using?
CommonMark and GFM.
What did you do?
I've used
*foo*
,**foo**
,~~foo~~
,~~**foo**~~
,~~***foo***~~
, and similar formats for the definition. Based on this, I expected patterns like the ones below to be reported as missing label references, but some were not detected.What did you expect to happen?
According to the AST, patterns like
*foo*
,**foo**
,~~foo~~
,~~**foo**~~
, and~~***foo***~~
can be recognized as valid label references:So, I expected the following patterns to be reported by this rule:
Link to minimal reproducible Example
What changes did you make? (Give an overview)
The current implementation only checks the
Text
node when detecting missing label reference syntax.However, this causes an issue when
Strong
,Emphasis
, orDelete
markers (represented by*
,_
, or~
) are used in the syntax.With these markers, a label like
[**foo**]
will have itsText
node split into[
,foo
, and]
as shown in the AST below, making it impossible to detect the missing label reference pattern.To resolve this issue, I examined the
Paragraph
,Heading
, andTableCell
nodes instead of simply examining theText
node.This is a common pattern in Markdown rules when examining error-prone syntax:
markdown/src/rules/no-bare-urls.js
Lines 143 to 156 in 3067607
markdown/src/rules/no-reversed-media-syntax.js
Lines 146 to 171 in 3067607
markdown/src/rules/no-space-in-emphasis.js
Lines 258 to 286 in 3067607
Related Issues
N/A
Is there anything you'd like reviewers to focus on?