markdown checker

[oyilmaztekin]

#140

• added markdown reader
• parsed markdown to the AST
• detected all tables
• collected all link definitions
• started to add tests

Discussions: https://github.com/tc39/proposals/issues/140#issuecomment-469321323

[oguzzkilic]

Adding it in eslint + airbnb configuration can be good for code standard.

[septs]

@ljharb

1. I want to integrate https://github.com/DavidAnson/markdownlint in gh-actions on push and pull-request pre-check

2. I want to integrate a link checker that is available every day

   1. check is redirected (3xx status code) e.q: repo transferred or renamed

   2. check is not found (404 status code) e.q: repo deleted

   3. don't check not github

3. Add Visual Studio Code pre-settings

   1. .vscode/settings.json

   {
       "editor.formatOnSave": true, // auto format
       "editor.codeActionsOnSave": {
       "source.fixAll": true // auto fix
    }
   }
   

   2. .vscode/extensions.json

   prompt to install extensions

   {
     "recommendations": ["DavidAnson.vscode-markdownlint"]
   }
   

[Jack-Works]

Not everyone using VSCode.

[ljharb]

Definitely editor-specific stuff isn't a good idea to include. If it's a linter tho, it should be able to run locally via eslint, which would be fine.

The trick with an action (or any CI check) is that inevitably someone's going to be blocked by a link going dark when it's unrelated to the change they're making. What we really need is something that can notice a link is dead, and then open up a PR or issue about it.

[septs]

@ljharb i think, i can integrate one link-checker on github action

on push and scheduled (run once a day)

[ljharb]

@septs how would we be notified when it failed? would that cause PRs to suddenly be blocked?

[septs]

@ljharb ye, will a notification, but will not prevent PR.

[septs]

@ljharb https://github.com/septs/proposals/actions/runs/276487127 https://github.com/septs/proposals/blob/master/.github/workflows/checking.yml

[septs]

https://github.com/tc39/proposals/pull/315/files

[oyilmaztekin]

@ljharb @littledan @chicoxyzzy final JSON output was created for stage 1. Still, things need to be improved, but let's discuss the output json file that has been added to the commit. This output was created automatically. Also, you can share your concerns about deployment pipeline implementation and the code quality.

For refreshing memories of what this PR was about https://github.com/tc39/proposals/issues/140#issuecomment-469321323 https://github.com/tc39/proposals/issues/188

[oyilmaztekin]

In addition, you can review the JSON output here. It will be the final result after we are done with that PR