Use a more flexible structure for the spec argument to validateVarArgs #309
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
added 6 commits
December 16, 2019 14:03
validateVarArgs' argument specification now uses a format that supports
multiple argument signatures, each of whose arguments are in turn a list
of supported types. For example, to achieve:
foo(string, [string|number])
foo(string)
Your argument would be:
{
{{STRING_OBJ}, {STRING_OBJ, NUMBER_OBJ}},
{{STRING_OBJ}},
}
Matching is done in order, giving priority to specs by lower index.
Additionally, validateVarArgs is now smart enough to figure out the
minimum and maximum number of arguments on its own.
When validateVarArgs fails to match a spec, it will return an error with
a usage string showing the alternate calling signatures. On success, it
will return the index of the matched signature as the second return
value.
odino
approved these changes
Dec 21, 2019
|
Base branch changed to |
odino
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 2, 2020
#309) * Use a more flexible structure for the spec argument to validateVarArgs validateVarArgs' argument specification now uses a format that supports multiple argument signatures, each of whose arguments are in turn a list of supported types. For example, to achieve: foo(string, [string|number]) foo(string) Your argument would be: { {{STRING_OBJ}, {STRING_OBJ, NUMBER_OBJ}}, {{STRING_OBJ}}, } Matching is done in order, giving priority to specs by lower index. Additionally, validateVarArgs is now smart enough to figure out the minimum and maximum number of arguments on its own. When validateVarArgs fails to match a spec, it will return an error with a usage string showing the alternate calling signatures. On success, it will return the index of the matched signature as the second return value. * arr.join() now defaults to an empty string as glue when no argument is specfied * validateVarArgs' error message should begin with 'Usage:' * Remove debug line * split() defaults to a single space * Update docs for join(), split()
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I was looking at #307 and realized that validateVarArgs was not really flexible enough to support actual function signatures, which could end up being confusing to the user, so I updated it: