Skip to content

Support URIs in part-of directives. #626

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 3 commits into from
May 10, 2017
Merged

Support URIs in part-of directives. #626

merged 3 commits into from
May 10, 2017

Conversation

munificent
Copy link
Member

Fix #615.

@munificent munificent requested a review from jakemac53 May 9, 2017 20:51
@munificent munificent requested a review from natebosch May 10, 2017 00:11
Copy link
Member

@natebosch natebosch left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

some pendantry about the usage of Function below. I don't necessarily think anyone is going to be looking at this file to learn how the feature works... but IMO we may as well be careful

<<<
Function(parameter1,
void printFn(param1, param2)) f;
>>>
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

[nit] no name on this one? what is interesting about having a shorter first parameter?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, not all of the tests have descriptions. I try to add them when it's worthwhile, but it's often obvious from the test.

In this case, it was an accidental copy/paste error and is redundant with the above one. Removed it.

VerylongParameterType
parameterName) f;
>>> split in function type and on variable name
Function(VeryVeryVeryVeryLongParameterType) veryLongVariableName;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

[nit] this isn't a VeryVeryVeryVeryLongParameterType it's a veryVeryVeryVeryLongParameterName

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It is actually a type (though it doesn't matter either way for this test). Unlike the old function type syntax, the new syntax wisely assumes if you omit one identifier, you're omitting the name, not the type.

Function(int, String, Function(parameter1, parameter2, parameter3)) f;
<<<
Function(
int,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

[nit] this is misleading... IIUC this is a parameter named 'int' of type 'dynamic'. Or am I wrong?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

See above.

@munificent munificent merged commit fdf9d12 into master May 10, 2017
@munificent munificent deleted the part-of-uri branch May 10, 2017 00:29
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants