Fix parsing of documents with only top-level Sections - #73
Merged
Conversation
Member
Author
|
This was uncovered writing a checklist for bedtime with my little boy. Fun! |
istathar
changed the title
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
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Encountered a nasty bug that a document with only top-level Sections, which by design is a valid and admissible Technique (and is even how
struct Techniqueis defined) was not being parsed but worse was being silently discarded.Fixed an omission in the formatter where sections were not being preceded by a blank line.
Added an example to the golden tests to enforce this remaining correct in the future.