docs/src/reference/gremlin-applications.asciidoc: @@ -294,8 +288,7 @@ v[2] v[3] v[4] v[5] -v[6] ----- +== v[6]
It is also possible to pass arguments to scripts. Any parameters following the file name specification are treated as arguments to the script. They are collected into a list and passed in as a variable called "args". The following @@ -316,8 +309,7 @@ When executed from the command line a parameter can be supplied: $ bin/gremlin.sh -e gremlin.groovy marko v[1] $ bin/gremlin.sh -e gremlin.groovy vadas -v[2] ----- +== v[2] Robert Dale On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Robert Dale <robd...@gmail.com> wrote: > Looks like master CHANGELOG picked up a conflict... > > <<<<<<< HEAD > == TinkerPop 3.3.0 (Gremlin Symphony #40 in G Minor) > . > . > . > > == TinkerPop 3.2.0 (Nine Inch Gremlins) > ======= > == TinkerPop 3.2.0 (Nine Inch Gremlins) > >>>>>>> asciidoc-header > > > Robert Dale > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Daniel Kuppitz <m...@gremlin.guru> wrote: > >> Ah, good find! That's the same issue I've had in the reference docs and >> recipes. Fixed. >> >> Cheers, >> Daniel >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Robert Dale <robd...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > git grep "== ==" >> > >> > Robert Dale >> > >> > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Robert Dale <robd...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > I see things like '== ==>6' in docs/src/upgrade/release-3.2. >> > > x-incubating.html >> > > >> > > Robert Dale >> > > >> > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Robert Dale <robd...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > > >> > >> ^d >> > >> >> > >> Robert Dale >> > >> >> > >> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:56 PM, Daniel Kuppitz <m...@gremlin.guru> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> > >>> This is one. I pushed the changes to tp32/ and master/. I only found >> > (and >> > >>> fixed) 2 minor issues, where my script produced a little formatting >> > mess. >> > >>> >> > >>> Cheers, >> > >>> Daniel >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 9:23 AM, Stephen Mallette < >> > spmalle...@gmail.com> >> > >>> wrote: >> > >>> >> > >>> > For whatever reason we started writing our headers in our docs >> with: >> > >>> > >> > >>> > Header >> > >>> > ====== >> > >>> > >> > >>> > Subheader >> > >>> > --------- >> > >>> > >> > >>> > SubSubHeader >> > >>> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> > >>> > >> > >>> > as opposed to the alternative: >> > >>> > >> > >>> > = This Is A Header >> > >>> > >> > >>> > == Subheader >> > >>> > >> > >>> > === SubSubHeader >> > >>> > >> > >>> > The downside with the first approach is that it forces us to do >> two >> > >>> things: >> > >>> > >> > >>> > 1. Remember the syntax for each header layer (which we all >> probably >> > >>> know >> > >>> > pretty well at this point, but still...) >> > >>> > 2. Ensure that the width of the header formatting line is equal to >> > the >> > >>> > length of the text above it. >> > >>> > >> > >>> > That second point is a killer sometimes. While I've trained >> myself to >> > >>> be >> > >>> > good at noticing that problem I know it's bitten us in releases >> over >> > >>> and >> > >>> > over and over again. >> > >>> > >> > >>> > Anyway, I think going to the alternative formatting would be >> better >> > and >> > >>> > propose to do a full reformatting. Please let me know if there are >> > any >> > >>> > concerns about doing that - if I don't hear back in the next few >> days >> > >>> I'll >> > >>> > proceed with the changes. >> > >>> > >> > >>> > Thanks, >> > >>> > >> > >>> > Stephen >> > >>> > >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >
