You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I like the idea: it should lead to less false positives, which is very important. It could even help spot typos in directive names!
As long as it's still fast to check a single file, so it can be used as a linter in an editor, I don't want rstlint to become slower than make suspicious from cpython, on my machine, for a full cpython/Doc/ check:
sphinx-lint takes 5.7s
make suspicious takes from 36s to 1m22s (depends on the cache)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
An idea of @jean-abou-samra, see: sphinx-doc/sphinx#10143 (comment)
I like the idea: it should lead to less false positives, which is very important. It could even help spot typos in directive names!
As long as it's still fast to check a single file, so it can be used as a linter in an editor, I don't want rstlint to become slower than
make suspicious
from cpython, on my machine, for a full cpython/Doc/ check:sphinx-lint
takes 5.7smake suspicious
takes from 36s to 1m22s (depends on the cache)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: