-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 846
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
feat(ecma): inject template methods #6555
Open
DimensionalDot
wants to merge
1
commit into
nvim-treesitter:master
Choose a base branch
from
DimensionalDot:ecma-method-injections
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+51
−25
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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 kindof open a weird can of wormholes. What about
foo.bar.sql
,foo.bar.baz.sql
,sql.bar
, ....I'd prefer to keep this in my own config, but not in nvim-treesitter.
Unless you can give clear reasonings why this won't lead to the can of worms above
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.
That's a fair point. Here's my reasoning for what it's worth:
The
foo.sql
pattern appears in one of the leading Javascript frameworks SQL SDKs (see Vercel's PostgreSQL SDK). This makes me feel that it is common enough to be covered here instead of in each user’s individual config (similar to how we already cover things like Styled Components via thestyled.div
injection).On the other hand, I can’t think of a non user-constructed scenario (or any library) that would have a pattern like
foo.bar.sql
,foo.bar.baz.sql
,sql.bar
. This makes me feel that these are niche/rare enough to not be covered here but instead in a given user’s config.While this doesn’t address why this wouldn’t open a can of worms, it does address why we might not feel compelled make any further changes related to it.
If you prefer the route of covering specific libraries (similar to Styled Components) let me know and I can amend this to have a (potentially separate) query only covering
sql
or even justclient.sql
.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 will go for only covering for the most popular (like top 500 node packages).
Vercel's Postgres is popular enough so I'd give it a pass. Not sure about other cases though.
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.
Sounds good. Are you thinking of walking back the changes except for that to the query that covers sql or would you rather I create a new query for just sql that covers this
foo.sql
case specifically?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.
Preferably writing a new query covering whatever that vercel postgres will be for + comments close to the new query