Skip to content

Add lambda expression and fix call expression #34

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 7, 2021

Conversation

stevanmilic
Copy link
Contributor

@stevanmilic stevanmilic commented Sep 1, 2021

Fix call expression to allow block as arguments (#21)

Update for comprehension to handle patterns

Fix for comprehension to detect assignment as an enumerator

Add access modifiers

Update trait definition to support modifiers

Update function definition/declaration to support operator naming

Update field expression to support operators as methods

@stumash
Copy link
Contributor

stumash commented Sep 4, 2021

anyway, other than the things I mentioned, LGTM!

@stevanmilic
Copy link
Contributor Author

@maxbrunsfeld can you take a look at this PR? and also #35?

@stevanmilic stevanmilic force-pushed the master branch 3 times, most recently from 0c5b095 to 1564db8 Compare September 7, 2021 13:14
Copy link
Contributor

@maxbrunsfeld maxbrunsfeld left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good! Thanks for adding good tests. I just left a couple of minor questions.

grammar.js Outdated
bindings: $ => seq(
'(',
commaSep($.binding),
')',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Minor nitpick - Could you make the indentation for the new lines consistent with the rest of the file?

grammar.js Outdated
),

_case_clauses: $ => seq('{', repeat1($.case_clause), '}'),
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just curious - what was the purpose of extracting this rule?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hmm good catch, it's not needed. I remember adding it because it's used in the call_expression, to dissalow f{}, but that's a valid expression.

Fix call expression to allow block as arguments (tree-sitter#21)

Update for comprehension to handle patterns

Fix for comprehension to detect assignment as an enumerator

Add access modifiers

Update trait, object and class parameter to support modifiers

Update scanner to support `with` on a new line

Update function definition/declaration to support operator naming

Update field expression to support operators as methods
@stevanmilic
Copy link
Contributor Author

@maxbrunsfeld I pushed the changes you requested, can we merge this ?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants