[fix] Logic error with quotes order

[trueberryless]

Initial checklist

• I read the support docs
• I read the contributing guide
• I agree to follow the code of conduct
• I searched issues and discussions and couldn’t find anything or linked relevant results below
• I made sure the docs are up to date
• I included tests (or that’s not needed)

Description of changes

In this line there is a small logic error, which went unnoticed because there are currently no tests for setting either smart or straight.

Detailed context:

Let's say these are the current vars:

markers = ['“”', '‘’', '«»']
stack = [{ "“", "smart", "open" }]

And now look at this line:

expected = markers[(stack.length + 1) % markers.length]

We take the length of the stack, which is 1, add 1 to it, which makes 2 and module (%) it with the length of the markers, which is 3, in order to make sure, that we don't get any out of range exception.

We expect that the expected variable is set to the first item in markers, namely '“”' because this is the very first quote in the paragraph, as you can see: The stack only has the one item, no other quotes have been opened.

However, the item with index 2 is the third item, which leads the plugin to say, that the first quote is wrong, it should be the third quote...

Basically, we are ALWAYS 2 indecies ahead of the actual marker we want to be in the var expected.

This went unnoticed until now, because all tests only ever have max 2 entries in the markers array, which by coincidence doesn't affect the output, because the module % resets it to 0, so expected gets set to the right item / right index.

In order to fix this behaviour, we have to subtract 1 from the stack length, so we are exactly at the index we want to be, like this:

expected = markers[(stack.length - 1) % markers.length]

If you have any further questions explaining the issue, please let me know!

• Fix [bug] When defining smart (or straight) with more than 2 entries, the order is evaluated wrong #11

[trueberryless]

As you can see, the tests I wrote in #11 are now passing (that's also the reason I also included them in this PR)

[trueberryless]

I left some suggestions, which should be committed before merging...

[wooorm]

Hi! Thanks!

The template includes <!--do not edit: pr--> — you can leave that. It’s a directive for the bots. Without it they don’t know what you are doing.

I like narrowing the problem down as much as possible, which results in a test, and then finding the smallest possible solution, which often impacts that test again.
So: thanks for your work! Boiled it down to a small patch myself.

[wooorm]

released in 6.0.1!