ruff/crates/ruff_annotate_snippets
John Stilley c35f2bfe32
Fixing various spelling errors (#16924)
<!--
Thank you for contributing to Ruff! To help us out with reviewing,
please consider the following:

- Does this pull request include a summary of the change? (See below.)
- Does this pull request include a descriptive title?
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->

## Summary

This is a cleanup PR. I am fixing various English language spelling
errors. This is mostly in docs and docstrings.

## Test Plan

The usual CI tests were run. I tried to build the docs (though I had
some troubles there). The testing needs here are, I trust, very low
impact. (Though I would happily test more.)
2025-03-23 08:08:40 +00:00
..
examples crates: vendor annotate-snippets crate 2025-01-15 13:37:52 -05:00
src Fixing various spelling errors (#16924) 2025-03-23 08:08:40 +00:00
tests ruff_annotate_snippets: support overriding the "cut indicator" 2025-01-15 13:37:52 -05:00
Cargo.toml crates: vendor annotate-snippets crate 2025-01-15 13:37:52 -05:00
LICENSE-APACHE crates: vendor annotate-snippets crate 2025-01-15 13:37:52 -05:00
LICENSE-MIT crates: vendor annotate-snippets crate 2025-01-15 13:37:52 -05:00
README.md crates: vendor annotate-snippets crate 2025-01-15 13:37:52 -05:00

This is a fork of the annotate-snippets crate. The principle motivation for this fork, at the time of writing, is issue #167. Specifically, we wanted to upgrade our version of annotate-snippets, but do so without changing our diagnostic message format.

This copy of annotate-snippets is basically identical to upstream, but with an extra Level::None variant that permits skipping over a new non-optional header emitted by annotate-snippets.

More generally, it seems plausible that we may want to tweak other aspects of the output format in the future, so it might make sense to stick with our own copy so that we can be masters of our own destiny.