Skip to content

Conversation

@Serene-Arc
Copy link

I implemented the rule from Steven King about adverbs in dialogue atribution, as described in issue #106

It's a fairly simple regex string that finds a piece of dialogue and checks to see if there is an adverb in the following phrase. I think it's fairly fragile but it's worked on the example texts that I've tested it with.

This is my first pull request and my first time contributing to a project that isn't my own so any help would be appreciated :)

@Nytelife26
Copy link
Contributor

@Serene-Arc I know this was a while ago, but are you still willing to work on it? Let me know.
Thanks for your submission either way.

@Serene-Arc
Copy link
Author

@Nytelife26 Hi! I am still willing to work on it :) This is a great tool

@Nytelife26
Copy link
Contributor

Nytelife26 commented May 30, 2021 via email

@Serene-Arc
Copy link
Author

Sure, I'll get to it as soon as I can

@Serene-Arc Serene-Arc force-pushed the dialogue-attribution branch from ef23c33 to 47a872b Compare May 30, 2021 22:22
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 31, 2021

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 93.72%. Comparing base (ae2161b) to head (bc183cd).
⚠️ Report is 109 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1080      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   90.19%   93.72%   +3.53%     
==========================================
  Files          83       84       +1     
  Lines        1203     1275      +72     
==========================================
+ Hits         1085     1195     +110     
+ Misses        118       80      -38     
Flag Coverage Δ
macos-latest 93.72% <100.00%> (+3.53%) ⬆️
py3.6 93.13% <100.00%> (+3.91%) ⬆️
py3.7 93.13% <100.00%> (+3.91%) ⬆️
py3.8 93.72% <100.00%> (+3.53%) ⬆️
py3.9 93.72% <100.00%> (+3.53%) ⬆️
pypypy3 93.13% <100.00%> (+3.91%) ⬆️
ubuntu-latest 93.72% <100.00%> (+3.53%) ⬆️
windows-latest 93.72% <100.00%> (+3.53%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@Nytelife26 Nytelife26 self-requested a review July 4, 2021 15:52
@Nytelife26
Copy link
Contributor

I went ahead and applied those suggested changes for you, @Serene-Arc. Any chance you could create tests for this new check at some point, and perhaps rewrite the file docstrings to be more descriptive like in other checks?

@Serene-Arc
Copy link
Author

@Nytelife26 Ah, thanks! I'd already applied the suggested changes but I'll overwrite them with these. I've got some tests written, just been busy with some other stuff sorry, so I'll get them done soon and bring in the docstrings to be in line with the rest of the project.

@Nytelife26
Copy link
Contributor

Nytelife26 commented Jul 5, 2021 via email

@Nytelife26 Nytelife26 added the cat: new-check Extraction and implementation of, or a request for, a new check label Sep 3, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

cat: new-check Extraction and implementation of, or a request for, a new check type: feat A new feature

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants