[doc] Document invalid characters that exists because of the genericity of the unicode checker#9042
Merged
Pierre-Sassoulas merged 2 commits intopylint-dev:mainfrom Sep 17, 2023
Conversation
Pierre-Sassoulas
added
Documentation 📗
Skip news 🔇
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #9042 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 95.75% 95.75%
=======================================
Files 173 173
Lines 18652 18652
=======================================
Hits 17860 17860
Misses 792 792 |
4 tasks
Refs pylint-dev#5953 Co-authored-by: Jacob Walls <jacobtylerwalls@gmail.com>
Pierre-Sassoulas
force-pushed
the
invalid-character-theoric-one
branch
from
08efe18 to
f85e422
Compare
jacobtylerwalls
approved these changes
Sep 17, 2023
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Type of Changes
Description
Refs #5953
As far as I know it's impossible to raise those two messages unless you construct a theoretical node in a unit test.