[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#22241: 25.0.50; etags Ruby parser problems
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#22241: 25.0.50; etags Ruby parser problems |
Date: |
Tue, 02 Feb 2016 20:16:17 +0200 |
> Cc: 22241@debbugs.gnu.org
> From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>
> Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 11:40:46 +0300
>
> On 01/31/2016 09:11 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> > Ah, so it _is_ important.
>
> It kind of is. But I can open a separate bug for it, if you want.
>
> > But then I'd need a complete specification
> > of what is needed. (And I already smell a tip of an iceberg.) Again,
> > the references are scarce and incomplete, but I already understand
> > that it could be either of the following
> >
> > attr_WHATEVER :foo
> > SOMETHING ; attr_WHATEVER :foo ; ...
> > attr_WHATEVER :foo, :bar; ...
> >
> > Is that true? Are there any other forms, or can the symbol be
> > followed only by a comma, a semi-colon, or whitespece?
>
> The newline might also be preceded by a comment, I suppose.
>
> But really, if recognizing attr_WHATEVER when it's just one of the
> instructions on a line presents a noticeable difficulty, you can
> disregard that case: nobody really does that in practice. Or we can
> disregard it at least until somebody complains.
>
> So you would handle
>
> attr_WHATEVER :foo, :bar # comment
>
> and probably
>
> attr_WHATEVER :bar;
>
> (the semicolon is redundant, but hey, it shouldn't be too hard to support)
>
> and the most difficult realistic case I can imagine looks like this:
>
> attr_WHATEVER :foo, :bar, # comment
> :qux, :tee
OK, this is all implemented, except...
> > And what ends
> > a line like that -- a newline, or can it be continued on the next
> > line?
>
> If there's a comma at the end of the current line, the argument list
> continues on the next one.
...this. If supporting such split definitions is important, it will
need a slightly more complex code.
> Let's go with my original suggestions, then:
>
> .rb .ru .rbw Rakefile Thorfile
Also done (and doing so exposed a real bug in etags).
Please take a look.
- bug#22241: 25.0.50; etags Ruby parser problems, Dmitry Gutov, 2016/02/01
- bug#22241: 25.0.50; etags Ruby parser problems, Dmitry Gutov, 2016/02/01
- bug#22241: 25.0.50; etags Ruby parser problems,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- bug#22241: 25.0.50; etags Ruby parser problems, Dmitry Gutov, 2016/02/02
- bug#22241: 25.0.50; etags Ruby parser problems, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/02/03
- bug#22241: 25.0.50; etags Ruby parser problems, Dmitry Gutov, 2016/02/03
- bug#22241: 25.0.50; etags Ruby parser problems, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/02/03
- bug#22241: 25.0.50; etags Ruby parser problems, Dmitry Gutov, 2016/02/04
- bug#22241: 25.0.50; etags Ruby parser problems, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/02/04
- bug#22241: 25.0.50; etags Ruby parser problems, Dmitry Gutov, 2016/02/04