Fix newline bug on folded scalar - #322
Open
ultimateanu wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
|
Thanks for your pull request! It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA). View this failed invocation of the CLA check for more information. For the most up to date status, view the checks section at the bottom of the pull request. |
Author
|
I did some minor code clean up based on LSP suggestions on |
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Fixes #313
Background
Issue #313 notes that an extra newline is being added to folded block scalars. This is because the
yaml_emitter_write_folded_scalarfunction has this line:This index variable is used when doing the look ahead from the current point in the scan to determine if we need to add a newline. I believe this is based on libyaml's emitter.c. However in that c library the checks using k are against a custom string type
yaml_string_twhich maintains an internal offset as evidenced by this line:But in golang, by using
k := 0we are always checking the first character and not correctly doing a look ahead to see if the next line has more linebreaks or blank spaces.Changes
kwhich is used for the look ahead to useito check from the current point forwardkTesting