[ASTPrinter] Print expressions #40691
Conversation
| Printer << " "; | ||
| visit(stmt->getBody()); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| void PrintAST::visitRepeatWhileStmt(RepeatWhileStmt *stmt) { | ||
| Printer << tok::kw_do << " "; | ||
| Printer << tok::kw_repeat << " "; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
do while has been renamed to repeat while for a few years now... 🙂
| @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ | |||
| // RUN: %target-swift-frontend -print-ast %s 2>&1 | %FileCheck %s | |||
| // RUN: %target-swift-frontend -print-ast-decl %s 2>&1 | %FileCheck %s | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It might be useful to add tests for the synthesized bodies for Equatable/Hashable/etc. But this existing test just wants to check the access level. Using the new -print-ast-decl makes this the least disruptive.
| void PrintAST::visitUnresolvedSpecializeExpr(UnresolvedSpecializeExpr *expr) { | ||
| visit(expr->getSubExpr()); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we print the generic arguments here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I couldn't find an example where this expression is created.
Generally, I'd like to merge this even if some expressions aren't printed 100% correct yet (there certainly are more parts missing).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's created by the parser for e.g Array<Int>, before the types have been resolved. It gets rewritten by the type-checker though, so I don't believe the current frontend printing option will come across it. But if we ever wanted to print the AST prior to type-checking, I think we should print the generic arguments. But yeah, that doesn't need to hold up this PR.
| // CHECK: @_hasInitialValue private let conditional: Archivable? = a as? Archivable | ||
| // CHECK: @_hasInitialValue private let forced: Archivable = a as! Archivable |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think we'll want to print access modifiers here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's really only used for debugging right now. If this was to be presented to a user, we'd want to filter this so it becomes:
let conditional = a as? Archivable
(removing @_hasInitialValue private and the explicit type annotation, if possible)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Right yeah, my main concern was just that e.g:
func foo() {
private let x = 0
}
isn't valid code
| _ = test(payload: payload) | ||
| } | ||
| // CHECK-LABEL: internal func process(payload: Payload) { | ||
| // CHECK-LABEL: if .empty = payload { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks like the case keyword was dropped here
|
@swift-ci please test |
|
Build failed |
Add new `-print-ast-decl` frontend option for only printing declarations, to match existing behavior. Some tests want to print the AST, but don't care about expressions. The existing `-print-ast` option now prints function bodies and expressions. Not all expressions are printed yet, but most common ones are.
|
@swift-ci please test |
|
Build failed |
|
@swift-ci please test |
Add new
-print-ast-declfrontend option for only printing declarations,to match existing behavior.
Some tests want to print the AST, but don't care about expressions.
The existing
-print-astoption now prints function bodies and expressions.Not all expressions are printed yet, but most common ones are.