Closed jeffreykegler closed 5 years ago
The underindented ones are in fact underindented; and uncrossing the triple wutlus seems reasonable yup
Added to anomaly.suppressions
. I am now marking this "Ready to be closed"
Closed as per the above.
I guess the first lint here is a good second example of the reanchoring pattern you mentioned, this one also feels "off" and like it would be better served by indenting everything to not be reanchored? (Presumably the == is no longer flagged as erroneous, but in this case all of the jog heads are vertically aligned with the parent rune which seems bad)
Tempted to say reanchoring is only valid when the reanchored body is the last child of the anchor brick rune, thus getting rid of the reanchor-offset machinery - what sorts of problems would that cause?
On Friday, 12 April 2019, Jeffrey Kegler notifications@github.com wrote:
Closed #20 https://github.com/jeffreykegler/yahc/issues/20.
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/jeffreykegler/yahc/issues/20#event-2273871084, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABxXhh0f-jDdalV0h9HE4IWSjQ6sOGYxks5vgTemgaJpZM4balQx .
tistis.lint.txt A few TISTIS anomalies. The one in
eyre
is an attempt at a criss-cross TISTIS line, but the WUTLUS's are just too close together for that to work.@ohAitch -- I think these all should go into
anomaly.suppressions
. Let me know what you think.