Skip to content
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

Fix #555 #683

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 28, 2019
Merged

Fix #555 #683

merged 3 commits into from
Oct 28, 2019

Conversation

st0012
Copy link
Member

@st0012 st0012 commented Jun 10, 2018

This closes #555

@st0012 st0012 added the Parser label Jun 10, 2018
@st0012 st0012 added this to the version 0.1.10 milestone Jun 10, 2018
@st0012 st0012 self-assigned this Jun 10, 2018
@st0012 st0012 requested a review from hachi8833 June 10, 2018 15:28
@ghost ghost added the in progress label Jun 10, 2018
compiler/ast/testable_expressions.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
compiler/ast/testable_expressions.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 10, 2018

Codecov Report

Merging #683 into master will increase coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #683      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   80.24%   80.25%   +<.01%     
==========================================
  Files          54       54              
  Lines        7402     7403       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits         5940     5941       +1     
  Misses       1237     1237              
  Partials      225      225
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
compiler/parser/parser.go 94.11% <100%> (+0.04%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 444cb91...a7a0a5d. Read the comment docs.

@hachi8833
Copy link
Member

Sorry for the delay: I'd check this 🙇

Copy link
Member

@hachi8833 hachi8833 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you very much for fixing the issue!

I prepared exhaustive tests for the issue, based on the old PR I once made.
And found some errors that need fixes.

How do I send the test to you?

@st0012
Copy link
Member Author

st0012 commented Jun 12, 2018

You can leave them in comment or push to the branch

@ghost ghost assigned hachi8833 Jun 12, 2018
@hachi8833
Copy link
Member

Pushed the updated branch.
You can see comments on errors in evaluation_test.go @st0012

@hachi8833
Copy link
Member

Just to memorize the additional tests for the PR

555_test.txt

hachi8833 added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 19, 2018
- See #683

- Updated some classes such as null.go, too
st0012 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 24, 2018
- See #683

- Updated some classes such as null.go, too
@st0012 st0012 modified the milestones: version 0.1.11, version 0.1.12 Oct 13, 2019
@st0012 st0012 requested a review from hachi8833 October 27, 2019 11:44
@st0012
Copy link
Member Author

st0012 commented Oct 27, 2019

@hachi8833 can you give it a quick review and I'll just merge it

Copy link
Member

@hachi8833 hachi8833 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

As far as I checked with the unary operators + and - on the fix, no wrong behavior has been found. Thank you very much!

(I was amazed the fix is very very small😳)

@hachi8833
Copy link
Member

@st0012 I noticed that this PR also fixes #568 as far as I rebased this to current master locally.
(Rebasing is OK, but several tests need fixes)

@st0012 st0012 merged commit 2600940 into master Oct 28, 2019
@st0012 st0012 deleted the fix-#555 branch October 28, 2019 14:02
@st0012
Copy link
Member Author

st0012 commented Oct 28, 2019

@hachi8833 really? I can't verify that right now, you can close #568 if you feel confident about the fix. I'd say it's ok to close it if we don't see errors from examples on the top description.

@hachi8833
Copy link
Member

I will verify if #568 is fixed after merging and close it. 👍

@hachi8833
Copy link
Member

Strange... this time the issue on #568 still persists😓. Forget it.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Positive unary operator like +1 unhandled
3 participants