Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update text_editors.rst #713

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

romainl
Copy link

@romainl romainl commented Mar 4, 2025

Add mention of Vim's native support.

The file currently lists two third-party plugins that allow using yamllint in Vim via their custom mechanism. Those plugins are popular because:

  1. they generally offer a more refined experience than the native way,
  2. they abstract thework of defining filetype/linter-specific options.

Now, Vim actually comes with its own mechanism for defining those filetype/linter-specific options: compiler scripts.

Since there is a compiler script for yamllint distributed with Vim (I wrote it), this commit adds a third alternative to the list that doesn't require users to install third-party plugins.

Add mention of Vim's native support.
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

coverage: 99.824%. remained the same
when pulling 91181d9 on romainl:patch-1
into e427005 on adrienverge:master.

@adrienverge
Copy link
Owner

Hello,

  • Can you precise what this "compiler script" is about, and how this commit which "adds mention of Vim's native support" is different from the already-existing paragrah "yamllint is supported by default"?

    (please explain this in the commit message)

  • Have you tried compiling the RST files? Does it render correctly? I'm surprised because generally, the :: shouldn't be indented the same as the code snippet inside.

    To keep things short, it's probably best to avoid such :: blocks and use inline snippets instead.

@romainl
Copy link
Author

romainl commented Mar 7, 2025

Hello,

  • I added the context you asked for. Is it clear enough?

  • I only previewed the file in GitHub, where it seemed OK to me.

    It was an attempt to have the code block properly indented under the preceding bullet point.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants