support did_you_mean >= v1.2.0 which has a breaking change on formatters #262
Conversation
This file contains 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
gfx
force-pushed
the
did_you_mean-v1.2.0
branch
from
7c01069
to
a991099
Compare
gfx
force-pushed
the
did_you_mean-v1.2.0
branch
from
a991099
to
9d2c8af
Compare
|
Good catch. Thanks! |
|
Ah. This breaking change is totally unintentional and DYM should maintain the compatibility. I'll fix that in did_you_mean too. Thanks so much for taking care of this! |
This was referenced Mar 22, 2018
This was referenced Mar 22, 2018
This was referenced Mar 7, 2021
Merged
This was referenced Mar 15, 2021
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
did_you_mean v1.2.0 has a breaking change to its formatter api:
ruby/did_you_mean@v1.1.2...v1.2.0
This PR uses the new
DidYouMean.formatter, keeping backward compatibility for did_you_mean pre-1.2.0.