Use the first long name in usage #179
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Sorting names for option has been changed. * Usage will choose the first long name, if available, or otherwise the first short name * Help screen will show short names, then long names, in the order of their declaration. Solves (#167)
ibrahimoktay
changed the title
natecook1000
reviewed
Jun 4, 2020
Member
natecook1000
left a comment
natecook1000
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks so much for this improvement, @ibrahimoktay! It looks like we need to make sure this is working in a couple edge cases — notes below.
Sources/ArgumentParser/Parsable Properties/NameSpecification.swift
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Checkin long names in sort caused single dash long names to be treated as a short name. Fixed sort to check “short” instead of “long” Update current test to cover more cases.
KyNorthstar
reviewed
Jun 7, 2020
Sources/ArgumentParser/Parsable Properties/NameSpecification.swift
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
natecook1000
reviewed
Jun 8, 2020
Sources/ArgumentParser/Parsable Properties/NameSpecification.swift
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
*Replace sortedNames with partitionedNames *Extract uniquifying logic into SequenceExtensions.swift
natecook1000
reviewed
Jun 9, 2020
Member
natecook1000
left a comment
natecook1000
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Almost there, @ibrahimoktay! Just one note below.
| } | ||
|
|
||
| var isShort: Bool { | ||
| return self == .short(self.valueString.first!) |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
One last nit — this should use pattern-matching on self instead of an equality comparison. We don't need to be accessing valueString for this.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, you are right. Just changed that.
Member
|
@swift-ci Please test |
compnerd
added a commit
to compnerd/swift-argument-parser
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 11, 2020
Add missing reference to `Utilities/SequenceExtensions.swift` which was failed to be updated with apple#179
natecook1000
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 12, 2020
Add missing reference to `Utilities/SequenceExtensions.swift` which was failed to be updated with #179
4 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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.
SortedNames for ArgumentDefinition has been changed.
NameSpecification now uses Array type for elements.
Solves (#167)
Replace this paragraph with a description of your changes and rationale. Provide links to an existing issue or external references/discussions, if appropriate.
Checklist