feat: add checkFootnoteDefinitions option to no-empty-definitions #442
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
snitin315
reviewed
Jun 26, 2025
snitin315
reviewed
Jun 26, 2025
lumirlumir
requested changes
Jun 26, 2025
snitin315
previously approved these changes
Jun 27, 2025
lumirlumir
requested changes
Jun 28, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Prerequisites checklist
What is the purpose of this pull request?
This pull request extends the
no-empty-definitionsrule to also report empty footnote definitions in Markdown files. This helps ensure that both regular definitions and footnote definitions are meaningful and not left empty by mistake.What changes did you make? (Give an overview)
Related Issues
Fixes #435
Is there anything you'd like reviewers to focus on?