[WIP] Pretty printing #60
Merged
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
szabo137
reviewed
May 17, 2024
|
@szabo137 Please have a look again. I reworked the printing and implemented the I've also removed most of the jldoctests and only kept the ones that I think add actual value for the documentation, showing an example construction of a |
szabo137
approved these changes
May 21, 2024
AntonReinhard
added a commit
to QEDjl-project/QEDbase.jl
that referenced
this pull request
May 27, 2024
As discussed in QEDjl-project/QEDprocesses.jl#60 the pretty printing should overload the 2 argument versions of `Base.show` instead of the 3 argument versions. This PR fixes that for QEDbase.jl
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Adds pretty printing for:
Essentially, adding similar functionality to QEDjl-project/QEDbase.jl#61 for the QEDprocesses types.
I'm using the jldoctests to test, I'm not sure if it's really necessary to test in a separate test as well. Putting single jldoctests for these prints in every type definition would clutter the documentation a bit so I've not done that. If we really want tests for each
show()we should probably do it in a test file.Also, I'm not sure if there's a better way for the print functions than alternating the
showfor objects andprintfor strings. Interpolating doesn't work unless we also overload theprint. (I think it is print, the number of string output related functions in Julia is confusing)