Refactor generation of SwiftSyntaxBuilder #350
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
Member
Author
|
@kimdv Please let me know what you think about this refactoring. |
Member
Author
|
@swift-ci Please test |
kimdv
approved these changes
Jan 6, 2022
Contributor
kimdv
left a comment
kimdv
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wow! 🎉
This is pretty good. Really nice job! 🥳
It was needed!
Just some inline comments/questions 😁
Sources/SwiftSyntaxBuilder/gyb_helpers/SyntaxBuildableWrappers.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Sources/SwiftSyntaxBuilder/gyb_helpers/SyntaxBuildableWrappers.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
ahoppen
force-pushed
the
pr/refactor-swiftsyntaxbuilder
branch
from
24392b4 to
faa6b1e
Compare
Member
Author
|
@swift-ci Please test |
Perform a complete refactoring of the way the `SwiftSyntaxBuilder` files are generated with the following goals: - Move complex Python logic from the `.gyb` files into proper Python files that are being imported to make the `.gyb` files more readable - Unify the location that the different `Buildable`, `ExpressibleAs` etc. types are being generated to reduce the likelihood of making a mistake when generating these types in the `.gyb` files - Reduce the number of extensions being used. All methods of structs should be implemented in the struct itself and all protocols should have a single extension directly underneath it that provides all default conformances. Previously, I was always scanning through the entire code base to find the location one particular method was implement. I think this also makes the result builder methods more discoverable since they are no longer hidden in an extension. - Reduce the dependency on `gyb_syntax_support` by moving `protocolMap.py` to this repository. The actual generated source code stays mostly the same, it is just ordered differently and split into multiple files.
ahoppen
force-pushed
the
pr/refactor-swiftsyntaxbuilder
branch
from
faa6b1e to
bcb9919
Compare
Member
Author
|
@swift-ci Please test |
kimdv
approved these changes
Jan 7, 2022
Contributor
kimdv
left a comment
kimdv
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have no further comments!
Really good and impressive work. Nice job 🥳
Member
Author
|
Thank you for the good review, Kim. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 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.
Perform a complete refactoring of the way the
SwiftSyntaxBuilderfiles are generated with the following goals:.gybfiles into proper Python files that are being imported to make the.gybfiles more readableBuildable,ExpressibleAsetc. types are being generated to reduce the likelihood of making a mistake when generating these types in the.gybfilesgyb_syntax_supportby movingprotocolMap.pyto this repository.The actual generated source code stays mostly the same, it is just ordered differently and split into multiple files.