Skip to content

Model params updated for YUIDocs #7835

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
May 21, 2025

Conversation

lukeplowden
Copy link
Member

Changes:
Amending #7832 to make the YUIDocs for model() count parameter optional.

PR Checklist

  • npm run lint passes
  • [Inline reference] is included / updated
  • [Unit tests] are included / updated

Copy link

@Copilot Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull Request Overview

This PR updates the YUIDocs for the model() method to indicate that the count parameter is now optional with a default value of 1.

  • Updated the JSDoc for the model() method to reflect the optional count parameter.
  • Modified the parameter description to show the default value [count=1].

@lukeplowden lukeplowden requested a review from davepagurek May 21, 2025 12:58
@@ -987,7 +987,7 @@ function loading(p5, fn){
* @method model
* @param {p5.Geometry} model 3D shape to be drawn.
*
* @param {Number} count number of instances to draw.
* @param {Number} [count=1] number of instances to draw.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks good! Mind running npm run docs and committing the results to double check that parameterData.json looks good when generated from this?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah right, yeah now its good. I changed the parameterData.json by hand before. It's not truly an overload, just an optional parameter.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ahh! I see the changes in the PR #7824 got worked perfectly fine here @davepagurek and @lukeplowden

Copy link
Contributor

@davepagurek davepagurek left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Awesome thanks, looks good to go!

@davepagurek davepagurek merged commit d51184b into processing:dev-2.0 May 21, 2025
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants