Currently, when looking at a checker documentation, we have to go back
to the whole list or look at the sources to figure out if an autofix
is available or not.
Feel free to propose a better wording
Here is the ugly way I used:
LIST=$(grep Yes list.rst|awk '{print $1}'|cut -d\` -f2)
or f in $LIST; do cat /tmp/a.txt >> $f.rst; done
with /tmp/a.txt containing the text
A few problems with this approach:
My proposal is to add a mandatory Automatic fixes or Suggested fixes section to all checker documentation files, require the authors to describe the nature of the fix more thoroughly, and use consistent wording when there is no fix. E.g.
or
or
WDYT?