-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 440
Further naming improvements for syntax node children #1896
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
11 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
850fcc8
Add validation that children should not end with 'Token'
ahoppen 91639f1
Validate that all children containing a syntax collection have a plur…
ahoppen 5c2923f
Verify that children are not named 'Identifier'
ahoppen 431c77b
Validate that no child contains the substring 'Identifier'
ahoppen 1aa235d
Validate that we don’t use abbreviations in child names
ahoppen e85288d
Validate that children don’t end with 'Expr', 'Expression', 'Type' etc
ahoppen 8e53ebe
Improve naming of some more syntax children
ahoppen 89d38e4
Update swift-syntax for renamed API
ahoppen 1062c22
Slightly improve syntax compatibility layer
ahoppen fcee3e1
Update CodeGeneration for renamed properties
ahoppen b9a3830
Address review comments
ahoppen 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 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
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
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.
We use
Name
for most other nodes, any reason to preferMacroName
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.
We use
Name
for nodes that declare something (e.g.StructDeclSyntax
), while this node refers to something. And I just thought that name alone here is a little ambiguous because it’s not entirely sure what the name is. I don’t have super strong opinions here though.