{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/catch22/octave-doctest/issues/96","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/catch22/octave-doctest/issues/96/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/catch22/octave-doctest/issues/96/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/catch22/octave-doctest/issues/96/events","html_url":"https://github.com/catch22/octave-doctest/issues/96","id":93619922,"number":96,"title":"Spit long rows","user":{"login":"catch22","id":119655,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/119655?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/catch22","html_url":"https://github.com/catch22","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/catch22/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/catch22/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/catch22/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/catch22/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/catch22/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/catch22/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/catch22/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/catch22/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/catch22/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":1,"created_at":"2015-07-07T20:22:33Z","updated_at":"2015-07-07T21:41:11Z","closed_at":null,"body":"What do you guys think about calling `split_long_rows` in the test driver (with the `local` option)? This should make doctests more reproducible and it complements nicely the \"whitespace compression\" feature."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/catch22/octave-doctest/issues/comments/119351003","html_url":"https://github.com/catch22/octave-doctest/issues/96#issuecomment-119351003","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/catch22/octave-doctest/issues/96","id":119351003,"user":{"login":"cbm755","id":818622,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/818622?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/cbm755","html_url":"https://github.com/cbm755","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/cbm755/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/cbm755/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/cbm755/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/cbm755/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/cbm755/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/cbm755/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/cbm755/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/cbm755/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/cbm755/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-07-07T21:41:11Z","updated_at":"2015-07-07T21:41:11Z","body":"I didn't know about this.  Sounds like a good idea to me.\r\n\r\nLonger term: ideally one could call that with an optional value of chars, overriding the terminal width.  Then we could decide on a value (e.g., 72 chars? some PEP has a suggested width for docstrings) and the test results would no longer depend on the current physical terminal width...  But this would require upstream Octave changes."}}