Format alternative syntax #1857
Open
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
Merged
|
Yeah, happy to have matching brackets, I think it's clearer too (boo python ;) ). |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This isn't necessarily to be merged but just building on some points in #1856
This applies a rule to enforce the braces as opposed to 'if' 'endif' syntax.
This ends up changing relatively few files - all templates - which makes sense as I was using it because it felt a little more readable in mixed files, but also the IDE is good at finding the matching brace.
Basically if there are two options and we have a preference, we could have a rule.