Use stored source instead of Unparser to format ASTs #827
Conversation
|
It seems the thing to do is to implement a simple formatter in each of our SexpExtensions, for the relevant node types. I wouldn't use |
Yes, exactly. We'd need to drop SexpFormatter completely, first of all because we'd remove |
mvz
force-pushed
the
remove-unparser
branch
4 times, most recently
from
fdbacea
to
66be5f2
Compare
mvz
changed the title
unparser.
|
@troessner, @chastell this is ready for review. I went a completely different route, using the actual source of the expression as provided by parser. |
| @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ Feature: Offer different ways how to load configuration | |||
| """ | |||
| smelly.rb -- 3 warnings: | |||
| [4, 5]:DuplicateMethodCall: Smelly#m calls @foo.bar 2 times [https://github.com/troessner/reek/blob/master/docs/Duplicate-Method-Call.md] | |||
| [4, 5]:DuplicateMethodCall: Smelly#m calls puts(@foo.bar) 2 times [https://github.com/troessner/reek/blob/master/docs/Duplicate-Method-Call.md] | |||
| [4, 5]:DuplicateMethodCall: Smelly#m calls puts @foo.bar 2 times [https://github.com/troessner/reek/blob/master/docs/Duplicate-Method-Call.md] | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why not leave the brackets? I find this better readable.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm now using the actual source text so it depends on how it's actually written there.
|
First review -> done. |
AST::Node stores the parsed source so we can use that directly. As a result, some smell masking may have to be adjusted. Since SexpFormatter is no longer needed, it is removed, as is its dependency, Unparser. Since Parser 2.3.0 behaves differently on certain syntax errors and support for it is part of an upcomping change, the allowed versions of Parser are limited, as Unparser did in the past.
|
Great job, merging! |
Use stored source instead of Unparser to format ASTs
No description provided.