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
These are the PRs that have MDX build errors due to code output formatted as plain text instead of a code block. All of these are ipynb-to-md conversions, so the formatting used to build on the old website but not on the Vercel build.
Unexpected character `'` (U+0027) after name,
expected a character that can start an attribute name,
such as a letter, `$`, or `_`; whitespace before attributes;
or the end of the tag
270 |
> 271 | <class 'int'>
| ^
272 | <class 'str'>
273 |
Maybe we could wrap it in a code block? But then it would look out of place with the rest of the code results, unless the rest were also in a code block.
@gabalafou and I talked about it. The easiest solution would be to wrap the code output into code blocks as well, but that does not make the code input and output visually distinct.
Once we decide on a solution, I can help implement the changes to the rest of these PRs.
Gabriel and I tried using admonitions styling to format the code output. However Markdown doesn’t have it’s own admonition syntax. The website does not have it's own admonition styling either. Here is a link some other admonition stylings we tried on an blog PR.
In the meantime we decided it would be better to try out and possibly install code output formatting such as with python-console, python-traceback or doctest formatting.
These are the PRs that have MDX build errors due to code output formatted as plain text instead of a code block. All of these are ipynb-to-md conversions, so the formatting used to build on the old website but not on the Vercel build.
For example, from #647:
I'm getting the Vercel build error:
error [Error: [next-mdx-remote] error compiling MDX:
Full error message:
Link to error
The context is showing the result of some code. Link to this section in the old blog website..
Maybe we could wrap it in a code block? But then it would look out of place with the rest of the code results, unless the rest were also in a code block.
@gabalafou and I talked about it. The easiest solution would be to wrap the code output into code blocks as well, but that does not make the code input and output visually distinct.
Once we decide on a solution, I can help implement the changes to the rest of these PRs.
PRs with this issue:
#647
#657
#653
#654
#656
#658
#659
#661
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: