Github user sanjaydasgupta commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/zeppelin/pull/3068
Thanks for the suggestion @zjffdu.
The same idea was given earlier by Leemoonsoo
[here](https://github.com/apache/zeppelin/pull/2502#issuecomment-323272122),
and I had then [moved all of the required
code](https://github.com/apache/zeppelin/pull/2834/commits/28688256f3b11e696c08ed10875e0596db8c0463#diff-f9d22f7302ae356454cdcc637942856f)
into the `interpolate(...)` method of the base class.
So, the PR for each interpreter now contains the following 4 elements:
1) The configuration changes (defining the `zeppelin.???.interpolate`
parameter) in the associated `interpreter-setting.json` file (seen
[here](https://github.com/apache/zeppelin/pull/3068/files#diff-1081c34c222dd47418550b2660730df6)),
2) The documentation changes in the associated `docs/interpreter/???.md`
file (seen
[here](https://github.com/apache/zeppelin/pull/3068/files#diff-dae0efb0a1eda2c293e809843480c781)),
3) A 2-line change to the interpreter's `interpret()` method causing it to
invoke `interpolate(...)` in the base class if `zeppelin.???.interpolate` is
found to be true (seen
[here](https://github.com/apache/zeppelin/pull/3068/files#diff-1c3f4657786b890b0c786adaec9b4004)),
and
4) The specific unit-test classes as applicable (seen
[here](https://github.com/apache/zeppelin/pull/3068/files#diff-d117ea24a43ae0fd6db3151c50c658dc)
and
[here](https://github.com/apache/zeppelin/pull/3068/files#diff-4388c6558b95f9b2944130ed7b0ab5a5))
Keeping this consistent set of files together in one PR helps the review
process IMHO, but I am open to any suggestions for further improvement.
---
