You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I cannot spot any particular bug in the layouting code here and it is certainly possible that pruning to 5 instead of 3 is necessary for examples of certain complexity.
Maybe the default config should be changed? Relevant questions:
How big is the impact on performance for some average brittany usage when reducing the "pruning-agressiveness" from 3 to 5?
How often are these non-optimal cases encountered?
Why don't we just use a list-comprehension there? It avoids tons of nesting.. (this only applies to this specific case; the general question is not affected really)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
There is another approach to this: For certain nodes, non-bottom-spacing modifier could be adapted to also apply a take 1 to the spacings. If applied carefully, this won't have any negative effects but might fix this and related issues. It'd also generally decrease the size of the search space.
This sample code:
requires config
with the default of 3 (instead of 5) brittany reformats the above to the non-optimal:
I cannot spot any particular bug in the layouting code here and it is certainly possible that pruning to 5 instead of 3 is necessary for examples of certain complexity.
Maybe the default config should be changed? Relevant questions:
Why don't we just use a list-comprehension there? It avoids tons of nesting..(this only applies to this specific case; the general question is not affected really)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: