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
fixes #15 SKIP_EMPTY_LINES feature for csv parser #153
Conversation
I don't think 2 features are needed, but I think |
I renamed the feature to Is there something to do to handle the deprecation since the old name I also made a change to the Regarding the documentation, I did not modify the javadoc html as I assumed it is generated, but I could not find from where. |
Oh shoot. I did not remember that Now: since support had not been implemented, I'd have been ok to change it for 2.10.0, but since that ship has sailed, I think we have 2 choices:
To me (1) seems like a better choice actually; we do need to document it, but that's fine. Apologies for not checking this before asking you to change this. |
@@ -65,12 +69,14 @@ | |||
protected boolean _trimSpaces; | |||
|
|||
protected boolean _allowComments; | |||
|
|||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Need to add @since
, once we figure which branch this should go in. Same for new methods.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I added @since 2.10
to the feature + the new method that replace the skip comments.
I am not sure where else I should put it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I usually add to method and field, but not a big deal for internal fields.
I reverted the name of the Feature to SKIP_EMPTY_LINES and added ̀@SInCE 2.10` as it was added in 2.10 anyway |
Ugh. There's a pretty nasty bug in here. Code fails to take into account the fact that only part of the document may be in buffer, leading to #191 ... :-( :-( :-(. |
I started an implementation of the SKIP_EMPTY_LINES feature based on the existing ALLOW_COMMENTS.
When enabled It ignores both empty and blank lines.
Do you prefer to have SKIP_EMPTY_LINES and a new SKIP_BLANK_LINES as separate features? or is it good enough to adapt the description of SKIP_EMPTY_LINES?