Conversation
|
Warning Rate limit exceeded@leynos has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 13 minutes and 46 seconds before requesting another review. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
WalkthroughThe changes revise two documentation files to improve code block formatting, language identifiers, indentation, and markdown compliance. No functional or semantic content is altered; all modifications are stylistic, focusing on clarity, consistency, and readability in code examples and tables. Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Poem
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate Unit Tests
🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
SupportNeed help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions. Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
Reviewer's GuideThis PR resolves markdownlint complaints by standardizing fenced code blocks and language specifiers, adding and scoping markdownlint-disable directives for long lines, and cleaning up table formatting and separator consistency across multiple documentation files. File-Level Changes
Tips and commandsInteracting with Sourcery
Customizing Your ExperienceAccess your dashboard to:
Getting Help
|
![codescene-delta-analysis[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/53921?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
|
@coderabbitai review |
✅ Actions performedReview triggered.
|
|
@sourcery-ai review |
![sourcery-ai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/48477?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @leynos - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!
Prompt for AI Agents
Please address the comments from this code review:
## Individual Comments
### Comment 1
<location> `docs/rust-testing-with-rstest-fixtures.md:277` </location>
<code_context>
-This example, adapted from concepts in 1 and 1, demonstrates a fixture
-providing a mutable `Repository` implementation.
+This example, adapted from concepts in 1 and 1, demonstrates a fixture providing
+a mutable `Repository` implementation.
</code_context>
<issue_to_address>
Typo: 'concepts in 1 and 1' is unclear.
Please clarify or correct the reference to 'concepts in 1 and 1'.
</issue_to_address>
### Comment 2
<location> `docs/rust-testing-with-rstest-fixtures.md:115` </location>
<code_context>
-```rust
+```
It is advisable to check `crates.io` for the latest stable version of `rstest`
(and `rstest_macros` if required separately by the version of `rstest` being
</code_context>
<issue_to_address>
The phrase 'It is advisable to check' indirectly addresses the reader and could be reworded to avoid 2nd person implication.
Consider rephrasing to a more impersonal construction, such as 'Checking crates.io for the latest stable version of `rstest` is recommended.'
</issue_to_address>Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @leynos - I've reviewed your changes - here's some feedback:
- The PR mixes 3- and 4-backtick code fences; consolidate to a consistent style (preferably standard 3-backticks) for all code blocks to avoid reader confusion.
- Consider centralizing the MD013 disable/enable directives (e.g., at the file level) instead of repeating them around each table to reduce clutter.
- Review the updated tables’ markdown separators and alignment—some rows appear misaligned or lack proper column dividers after reformatting.
Prompt for AI Agents
Please address the comments from this code review:
## Overall Comments
- The PR mixes 3- and 4-backtick code fences; consolidate to a consistent style (preferably standard 3-backticks) for all code blocks to avoid reader confusion.
- Consider centralizing the MD013 disable/enable directives (e.g., at the file level) instead of repeating them around each table to reduce clutter.
- Review the updated tables’ markdown separators and alignment—some rows appear misaligned or lack proper column dividers after reformatting.
## Individual Comments
### Comment 1
<location> `docs/rust-testing-with-rstest-fixtures.md:115` </location>
<code_context>
-```rust
+```
It is advisable to check `crates.io` for the latest stable version of `rstest`
(and `rstest_macros` if required separately by the version of `rstest` being
</code_context>
<issue_to_address>
The phrase 'It is advisable to check' indirectly addresses the reader and could be rephrased to avoid 2nd person implication.
Consider rephrasing to a more impersonal construction, such as 'Checking crates.io for the latest stable version of `rstest` is recommended.'
</issue_to_address>Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @leynos - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!
Prompt for AI Agents
Please address the comments from this code review:
## Individual Comments
### Comment 1
<location> `docs/rust-testing-with-rstest-fixtures.md:115` </location>
<code_context>
-```rust
+```
It is advisable to check `crates.io` for the latest stable version of `rstest`
(and `rstest_macros` if required separately by the version of `rstest` being
</code_context>
<issue_to_address>
The phrase 'It is advisable to check' indirectly addresses the reader and could be rephrased to avoid implied 2nd person.
Consider rephrasing to a more impersonal construction, such as 'Checking crates.io for the latest stable version of `rstest` is recommended.'
</issue_to_address>Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.
|
@sourcery-ai review |
|
@coderabbitai review |
✅ Actions performedReview triggered.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @leynos - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!
Prompt for AI Agents
Please address the comments from this code review:
## Individual Comments
### Comment 1
<location> `docs/rust-testing-with-rstest-fixtures.md:122` </location>
<code_context>
+included in production binaries, which helps keep them small and reduces compile
+times for non-test builds.11
### B. Your First Fixture: Defining with `#[fixture]`
</code_context>
<issue_to_address>
The heading uses 'Your', which is a 2nd person pronoun and should be avoided per the instructions.
Consider rephrasing the heading to avoid 2nd person, e.g., 'Defining the First Fixture with #[fixture]'.
</issue_to_address>Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @leynos - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!
Prompt for AI Agents
Please address the comments from this code review:
## Individual Comments
### Comment 1
<location> `docs/rust-testing-with-rstest-fixtures.md:122` </location>
<code_context>
+included in production binaries, which helps keep them small and reduces compile
+times for non-test builds.11
### B. Your First Fixture: Defining with `#[fixture]`
</code_context>
<issue_to_address>
The heading uses 'Your', which is a 2nd person pronoun and should be avoided per the instructions.
Consider rephrasing the heading to avoid 2nd person, such as 'Defining a First Fixture with #[fixture]'.
</issue_to_address>Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @leynos - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!
Prompt for AI Agents
Please address the comments from this code review:
## Individual Comments
### Comment 1
<location> `docs/rust-testing-with-rstest-fixtures.md:122` </location>
<code_context>
+included in production binaries, which helps keep them small and reduces compile
+times for non-test builds.11
### B. Your First Fixture: Defining with `#[fixture]`
</code_context>
<issue_to_address>
The heading uses 'Your', which is a 2nd person pronoun and should be avoided per the instructions.
Consider rephrasing the heading to avoid 2nd person, e.g., 'Defining the First Fixture with #[fixture]'.
</issue_to_address>Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.
|
@coderabbitai Please create new GitHub issues for the following: The file rust-testing-with-rstest-fixtures.md is currenty written in the second person. Please re-word this to third person (excepting accepted terminology such as "DRY"/"Don't Repeat Yourself"). |
|
Tip For best results, initiate chat on the files or code changes. 🧩 Analysis chainNow I'll create the GitHub issue: @leynos I've created a GitHub issue to track the task of rewriting the The issue has been assigned to you and includes clear acceptance criteria for the task. 🏁 Script executed: Length of output: 3642 🏁 Script executed: Length of output: 1244 @leynos Perfect! I've successfully created GitHub issue #64 for rewriting the The issue is now available at: #64 The analysis confirmed that the file does indeed contain second person language patterns (like "you", "your", "focus on the important stuff in your tests", "Add the following lines to your The issue includes:
The issue is ready for implementation when you're ready to tackle this documentation improvement task. |
leynos
deleted the
ck31vz-codex/fix-markdownlint-errors-in-markdown-files
branch
1 participant
Summary
Testing
markdownlint **/*.mdcargo fmt --allcargo clippy --workspace --all-targets --all-features -- -D warningscargo test --workspace --all-targets --all-featuresnixie docs/rust-testing-with-rstest-fixtures.md docs/testing-differential-datalog-rulesets.mdhttps://chatgpt.com/codex/tasks/task_e_684f78315e1c83229e1cc060ffd9137b
Summary by Sourcery
Apply markdownlint fixes to documentation, standardizing code block syntax, table formatting, and list indentation across multiple markdown files
Documentation:
Summary by CodeRabbit