Closed gaborcsardi closed 4 years ago
I think we need a default value for the macros
parameter in spell_check_file_rd
because now it doesn't work at all if we don't specify macros :
> spell_check_files("man/spell_check_files.Rd")
# Error in tools::RdTextFilter(rdfile, macros = macros) :
# argument "macros" is missing, with no default
Merging #44 into master will decrease coverage by
0.88%
. The diff coverage is0%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #44 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 45.11% 44.22% -0.89%
==========================================
Files 7 7
Lines 317 303 -14
==========================================
- Hits 143 134 -9
+ Misses 174 169 -5
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
R/spell-check.R | 30.7% <0%> (-0.12%) |
:arrow_down: |
R/check-files.R | 63.51% <0%> (+0.35%) |
:arrow_up: |
R/rmarkdown.R | 33.33% <0%> (-10.67%) |
:arrow_down: |
R/parse-markdown.R | 83.33% <0%> (-0.88%) |
:arrow_down: |
R/remove-chunks.R | 85.71% <0%> (-0.65%) |
:arrow_down: |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)
,ø = not affected
,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 569a24f...befbd78. Read the comment docs.
I changed it to use the RdTextFilter
default if macros
is not specified.
Thanks. Is the ...
in spell_check_file_one()
really needed you think? I guess most users will just use spell_check_package()
for Rd files?
I think it's a bit confusing to have undocumented parameters in ...
that only apply to a specific format (rd in this case). It it's not essential I'm going to take that out.
Looks good otherwise I think.
I don't think it is essential, but I don't know when spell_check_file_one()
is called.
OK I'll take it out then. It's only used for spell_check_files()
, i.e. manually spelling checking a single file that is not part of a pkg.
I took it out.
OK looks good now thanks!!
Closes #42