More jinja block escapes #212
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
nicholasyager
approved these changes
Jun 21, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@dave-connors-3 Thanks for adding these extra test cases and updating the Jinja regex accordingly. Great work!
nicholasyager
approved these changes
Jul 11, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This PR solves the other half of beniots #210 !
This allows for list, dict, and newline characters in our jinja block search regex
I am sorry in advance, I branched from the other branch instead of main which i thought would be better but I see now is far worse. We should merge #211 first!