Doc Scraper Fixes #585
Merged
Doc Scraper Fixes #585
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
markwpearce
force-pushed
the
doc_scraping_fixes
branch
from
6d75551 to
0e62fb1
Compare
markwpearce
force-pushed
the
doc_scraping_fixes
branch
from
2a20bca to
b8eb9b3
Compare
|
@TwitchBronBron -- I think this deals with all the issues that you raised previously |
TwitchBronBron
requested changes
Sep 1, 2022
markwpearce
force-pushed
the
doc_scraping_fixes
branch
from
73f7e52 to
04c3b8b
Compare
TwitchBronBron
approved these changes
Sep 1, 2022
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
A few fixes to the doc scraper to grab a few more missing types
FWIW, here are a few fixes to the doc scrapper... There were a few places where the property names and such had extra slashes in them, and a few places where the types were not found or the like.
I originally wanted to look at generating Typedefs, by using
InterfaceStatement, etc... but typedefs should have the comments in them, especially for@param, etc. and the Statements don't have those included.... so that work needs to wait until #512 is addressed.