{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/egonSchiele/contracts.ruby/issues/114","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/egonSchiele/contracts.ruby/issues/114/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/egonSchiele/contracts.ruby/issues/114/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/egonSchiele/contracts.ruby/issues/114/events","html_url":"https://github.com/egonSchiele/contracts.ruby/pull/114","id":63703938,"number":114,"title":"Add initial YARD support","user":{"login":"sfcgeorge","id":885003,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/885003?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/sfcgeorge","html_url":"https://github.com/sfcgeorge","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/sfcgeorge/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/sfcgeorge/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/sfcgeorge/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/sfcgeorge/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/sfcgeorge/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/sfcgeorge/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/sfcgeorge/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/sfcgeorge/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/sfcgeorge/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":13,"created_at":"2015-03-23T11:44:26Z","updated_at":"2015-03-28T22:14:42Z","closed_at":null,"pull_request":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/egonSchiele/contracts.ruby/pulls/114","html_url":"https://github.com/egonSchiele/contracts.ruby/pull/114","diff_url":"https://github.com/egonSchiele/contracts.ruby/pull/114.diff","patch_url":"https://github.com/egonSchiele/contracts.ruby/pull/114.patch"},"body":"YARD documentation generation for Contracts has been made a gem [yard-contracts](https://github.com/sfcgeorge/yard-contracts) Fixes #32 \r\n\r\nThis pull request adds a minor feature to the Formatters. The new `full` parameter means inspect will output an empty string (when `full=false`) if the `to_s` value would be useless. This is to prevent duplication in yard-contracts; A param docstring is the type (inspect) followed by the description (to_s). Without this patch the type and description can end up being the same which looks odd.\r\n\r\nIn MRI Ruby < 2 inspect calls to_s so they _always_ are the same. I couldn't find a way to make this work in those old Rubies. JRuby 1.9mode is fine. It doesn't affect the main Contracts gem because when they are the same it calls inspect, but as inspect calls to_s it happens to work as expected.\r\n\r\nCurrently I have duplicated/overridden this code in yard-contracts so it works for now without this pull request. If you decide to merge then I can take this bit out of yard-contracts."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/egonSchiele/contracts.ruby/issues/comments/87323106","html_url":"https://github.com/egonSchiele/contracts.ruby/pull/114#issuecomment-87323106","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/egonSchiele/contracts.ruby/issues/114","id":87323106,"user":{"login":"nixpulvis","id":715947,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/715947?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/nixpulvis","html_url":"https://github.com/nixpulvis","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/nixpulvis/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/nixpulvis/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/nixpulvis/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/nixpulvis/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/nixpulvis/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/nixpulvis/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/nixpulvis/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/nixpulvis/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/nixpulvis/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-03-28T22:14:42Z","updated_at":"2015-03-28T22:14:42Z","body":"I think 1 is the best because it most directly follows other rules about aligning elements. There is no reason that expressions that come after the first expression should be indentet."}}