| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
the context
The basic idea is that "a" and "+" are either pretty-printed as "a" and "(+)" or "`a`" and "+"
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
This updates tests due to Haddock Trac #271 fix and due to removal of
TypeHoles as an extension from GHC.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The nesting rules are similar to Markdown's with the exception that we
can not simply indent the first line of a hard wrapped indented
paragraph and have it treated as if it was fully indented. The reason is
differences in markup as some of our constructs care about whitespace
while others just swallow everything up so it's just a lot easier to not
bother with it rather than making arbitrary rules.
Note that we now drop trailing for string entities inside of lists. They
weren't needed and it makes the output look uniform whether we use a
single or double newline between list elements.
Conflicts:
src/Haddock/Parser.hs
test/Haddock/ParserSpec.hs
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Any extensions that are not enabled by a used language (Haskell2010
&c) will be shown. Furthermore, any implicitly enabled are also going
to be shown. While we could eliminate this either by using the GHC API
or a dirty hack, I opted not to: if a user doesn't want the implied
flags to show, they are recommended to use enable extensions more
carefully or individually. Perhaps this will encourage users to not
enable the most powerful flags needlessly. Enabled with show-extensions.
Conflicts:
src/Haddock/InterfaceFile.hs
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Conflicts:
src/Haddock/Backends/Hoogle.hs
src/Haddock/Interface/Rename.hs
src/Haddock/Parser.hs
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Also simplify specs and parsers while we're at it. Some parsers were
made more generic.
This commit is a part of GHC pre-merge squash, email
fuuzetsu@fuuzetsu.co.uk if you need the full commit history.
|
| |
|
|
| |
We also check that we have parsed everything with endOfInput.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We remove the HTML test as it is no longer necessary. We cover the
test case in spec tests and other HTML tests but keeping this around
fails: this is because the new parser has different semantics there.
In fact, I suspect the original behaviour was a bug that wasn't
caught/fixed but simply included as-is during the testing.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
