Anticipate more knitr engines in code blocks #1552
Conversation
Closes #796 Plus styling changes.
To ask for guidance? |
basically, yes. do they recommend package authors register engines in .onLoad? how else might we detect engines in our use case? |
|
Filed: rstudio/tufte#117 And: yihui/knitr#2181 |
|
Thanks for filing the issues, @MichaelChirico! |
|
rstudio/tufte#117 now closed: rstudio/tufte@a097026 What remains to be done on this PR? |
I am no longer hardcoding I don't think there is anything else that needs to be done here. |
|
Yihui notes in yihui/knitr#2181 there's no strong recommendation for engines to be registered If there's demand, we could also consider, e.g. a |
| @@ -44,6 +44,25 @@ | |||
| * `boolean_arithmetic_linter()` for identifying places where logical aggregations are more appropriate, e.g. | |||
| `length(which(x == y)) == 0` is the same as `!any(x == y)` or even `all(x != y)` (@MichaelChirico) | |||
|
|
|||
| ## Notes | |||
|
|
|||
| * `lint()` continues to support Rmarkdown documents. For users of custom .Rmd engines, e.g. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@IndrajeetPatil PTAL. I moved it from "bug fixes" because there's no longer any code change by lintr. I still don't feel like I have a 100% grasp of the situation, so feel free to refine the item further.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks, Michael. This looks good to me.
I think we can revise this further as our understanding of the issue evolves while working on #1617.
Co-authored-by: Indrajeet Patil <patilindrajeet.science@gmail.com>
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1552 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 98.25% 98.25%
=======================================
Files 98 98
Lines 4352 4352
=======================================
Hits 4276 4276
Misses 76 76
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. |
Closes #796
Related to #797
Plus styling changes.