Coverage decreased (-1.6%) to 98.438% when pulling 6403f88 on T2L:patch-1 into 908832c on consolidation:master.

Coverage remained the same at 100.0% when pulling 4d4df53 on T2L:patch-1 into a27cf1c on consolidation:master.

AppVeyor fails due to issues with configuration

@greg-1-anderson, please review

Don't worry about the Appveyor failure; the cause is that they only offer one version of PHP at a time, and they recently switched from 7.3 to 7.4 as their one version. We'd have to add PHP 7.4 support here to bring back Appveyor testing. Probably not hard, but optional.

As far as I understand the existing code is not able to match comments with edited lines. Such comments will be lost.

My patch tries to work around this issue by introducing line ids. Let's go with the slightly changed example from tests:

# Top comments
top:
  # Top one
  one:
    # Top two
    two: two
# Bottom comments
bottom:
  # Bottom one
  one:
    # Bottom two
    two: 2

My code generates ids based on keys (discarding values). Additionally, duplicating keys are taken into account as well. The following ids will be generated:

1|top
1|  one
1|    two
1|bottom
2|  one
2|    two

This approach (partially) handles this issue:

> Comments that appear before sections of yaml that are edited may
> be inadvertently lost. It is recommended to always place comments
> immediately before identifier lines (i.e. "foo:").

As a result, I was able to preserve all comments in my interactively edited yaml file.

Hope my explanations are clear :)

That explanation is good; could you make it a code comment or part of the documentation, though?

Also, somewhere it would be good to compare/contrast what happens if this remapping is not done. For example, in the existing implementation of this code, I think that maybe the comment "Bottom two" would end up being attached to both "two:" elements.

The README implies that the existing code works in the same way as the new code. Maybe you could move just the test to another PR, so that we can see a failing test?

hi @greg-1-anderson:

• I've added new PR with - see Improve line matching mechanism by introducing line ids [test only] #4
• My test YAMLs were not valid (oops). So I've added an extra step to actually validate them
• Added detailed comments to the method

hi @greg-1-anderson - any updates on this one?

hi @greg-1-anderson - are you planning to commit this PR?

hi @greg-1-anderson - any chance this would be committed? It's been almost half of a year now :) Just let me know. Don't want to fork but unless this is the only option - I will.

Thanks!

P.S. Hope, you are safe