-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.6k
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
[WIP] Import AST from JSON format (try 2) #2500
Conversation
There is one bit about which i am unhappy and would like your help: I think the most appropriate way would be deal with the the generated warninsgs would be to output only the type of warning without the entire code. I am unsure about how to (elegantly) adjust the printExceptionInformation to that end. |
Is this replacing #2328? |
Yes, I don't have write access anymore so I had to do it that way..
Also couldn't change the label to needsReview
…On Jul 2, 2017 01:55, "Alex Beregszaszi" ***@***.***> wrote:
Is this replacing #2328 <#2328>?
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2500 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJbMXJ_pRRLgrKfkKHF_vhhwuD-ovmupks5sJsBrgaJpZM4OLa5c>
.
|
@djudjuu pushed this changeset to the original branch to see which comments were left open (there are a couple), can you please check them there? |
Hi @axic , Also, I put a question in the comment in CompilerStack.cpp l. 846....it's in the metadata creation function, which is also the place where I felt the most unsure about my choices. |
Sorry for the delay. Thanks! Pushed your version to #2328 and can confirm all the questions were addressed. |
cheer |
I (finally) updated the missing pieces, yet I don't know what to do about the appveyor error. @chriseth can you help? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please rebase also.
@@ -73,6 +73,9 @@ class CommandLineInterface | |||
|
|||
/// Fills @a m_sourceCodes initially and @a m_redirects. | |||
void readInputFilesAndConfigureRemappings(); | |||
/// Tries to read the ASTs from @ m_sourceCodes and to generate the input for | |||
/// the compiler's importASTs()-function. | |||
std::map<std::string, Json::Value const*> parseAstFromInput(); //use const here? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should use const
if it isn't changing the state.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
hmm, it does set m_sourceCodes
also it reads the input file into a newly created Json::Value which after that never changes, thats why i though that Json::Value have a const*.
not sure, what that implies...
@@ -204,6 +204,7 @@ Bugfixes: | |||
Features: | |||
* Syntax Checker: Deprecated "throw" in favour of require(), assert() and revert(). | |||
* Type Checker: Warn if a local storage reference variable does not explicitly use the keyword ``storage``. | |||
* AST: import a Json to AST. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is in the wrong version, also please capitalise to JSON.
private: | ||
template <typename T, typename... Args> | ||
ASTPointer<T> createASTNode(Json::Value const& _node, Args&&... _args); | ||
SourceLocation const createSourceLocation(Json::Value const& _node); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can this really be const?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i though so, as the json that is passed in is never modified.
@djudjuu Are you planning on continuing with this? I'm just starting to look into it and I could help you in rebasing it (it has been dormant for quite a while now) and finishing it - or I could just take it over. |
Hi @ekpyron ,
I have been meaning to continue working on this for ages. So yes, I am very interested to continue working on it, unfortunately my other work has been getting in the way.
If you'd be down to pair on it a little bit or just rebase it for a start, that'd be cool.
I am really keen on seeing it done because I want to start
experimenting with a mutation-testing framework :)
So far my plan was to start working on it after december 5th, when I go
into vacation, but if you're down, we could start addressing it before that
too.
|
@djudjuu Ok, sounds great! I'll probably look into rebasing it sometime this week then and after that we can decide how to proceed. |
Should be removed. |
I looked into rebasing this a while ago, but the PR seems to be in a somewhat messy state (e.g. there's merge conflict markers in some of the commits that are only removed later, etc.) - so it may make sense to recreate it from scratch instead. |
I tried rebasing it yesterday, but due to the merge commits it is rather hard. Tried rebasing it on an older head just to remove the merge and then squash, but haven't finished it yet. |
It is probably easier to just create this from scratch. |
I rebased the branch, included the CR's from the original branch and cleaned up the code.
Replaces #2328.
Closes #2096.