fix: print_step not using width parameter

[atusy]

Althou variety of print.step_*() passes its own width to print_step(), print_step() is not using it.

This PR fixes the problem.

Example of widths defined by print.step_*() are below

recipes/R/dummy.R

Lines 313 to 314 in 17211e6

	print.step_dummy <-
	function(x, width = max(20, options()$width - 20), ...) {

recipes/R/inverse.R

Lines 110 to 111 in 17211e6

	print.step_inverse <-
	function(x, width = max(20, options()$width - 33), ...) {

[EmilHvitfeldt]

Hello @atusy! Thanks for looking into this, unfortunately this isn't an issue. The code is written the way it is because the old way of printing the steps with printer()

recipes/R/misc.R

Lines 299 to 302 in 6bc9cb0

	printer <- function(tr_obj = NULL,
	untr_obj = NULL,
	trained = FALSE,
	width = max(20, options()$width - 30)) {

used to use width as a way to figure out how wide to print. It wasn't working that well and it is now no longer needed as print_step() is able to calculate everything it needs itself.

The arguments are still there to avoid breaking stuff as we moved over the change

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically locked. If you believe you have found a related problem, please file a new issue (with a reprex https://reprex.tidyverse.org) and link to this issue.