Fixed testAvailabilityQueryUnavailability34a #1464

CippoX · 2023-03-29T12:54:19Z

I'm clearly doing something wrong because Source Control keeps breaking down. Problems aside, I've implemented the changes you suggested and now it looks way better. Unfortunately I am still having trouble fixing this edge case
if #available(*) == false && other_condition

Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/SyntaxExtensions.swift

Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/ParseDiagnosticsGenerator.swift

Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/SyntaxExtensions.swift

CippoX · 2023-03-31T12:05:22Z

@ahoppen I've fixed everything you suggested. However, the fact that I had to introduce two new elements getTokenRange and ReplaceWithMultipleTokensFixIt, looks odd to me. Is there a better way?

CippoX · 2023-03-31T15:08:15Z

The only way I see to fix this specific case if #available(*) == false && other_condition, is to assign unexpectedBeforeKeepGoing to another variable like

public struct RawConditionElementSyntax: RawSyntaxNodeProtocol {
  ...
  public var unexpectedInsteadOfTrailingComma: RawUnexpectedNodesSyntax? {...}
  ...
}

Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/SyntaxExtensions.swift

Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/ParseDiagnosticsGenerator.swift

Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/ParserDiagnosticMessages.swift

Tests/SwiftParserTest/translated/AvailabilityQueryUnavailabilityTests.swift

CippoX · 2023-04-05T15:35:36Z

If you don't mind, I would like to resolve the visit(_ node: ForInStmtSyntax) FIXME in another PR.

ahoppen

Thank you. The PR looks veery good now. I’ve got three local comments but they should be straightforward to fix. After this we can merge it. 🎉

Sources/SwiftParser/Statements.swift

Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/ParseDiagnosticsGenerator.swift

ahoppen

Thank you for improving the diagnostic. This looks good.

ahoppen · 2023-04-06T16:33:52Z

@CippoX Could you rebase your PR onto main. There appears is a merge conflict.

CippoX · 2023-04-06T16:55:11Z

@ahoppen now everything should be ok 👍

ahoppen · 2023-04-06T16:56:24Z

Thanks. If CI is happy, I’ll merge it.

@swift-ci Please test

ahoppen · 2023-04-06T20:30:42Z

CI failed in one test case, I was curious what it was, debugged it and this diff should fix the problem. Could you apply it to your PR?

diff --git a/Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/MissingNodesError.swift b/Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/MissingNodesError.swift
index 9e17832a6..7faffba2d 100644
--- a/Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/MissingNodesError.swift
+++ b/Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/MissingNodesError.swift
@@ -112,13 +112,17 @@ func nodesDescription<SyntaxType: SyntaxProtocol>(_ nodes: [SyntaxType], format:
 func nodesDescriptionAndCommonParent<SyntaxType: SyntaxProtocol>(_ nodes: [SyntaxType], format: Bool) -> (commonAncestor: Syntax?, description: String) {
   let missingSyntaxNodes = nodes.map(Syntax.init)
 
-  // If all tokens in the parent are missing, return the parent type name.
-  if let commonAncestor = findCommonAncestor(missingSyntaxNodes),
+  // If all tokens in the parent are missing, return the parent type name unless
+  // we are replacing by a single token that has explicit text, in which case we
+  // return that explicit text.
+  if !isIdentifierWithCustomName,
+    let commonAncestor = findCommonAncestor(missingSyntaxNodes),
     commonAncestor.isMissingAllTokens,
     let firstToken = commonAncestor.firstToken(viewMode: .all),
     let lastToken = commonAncestor.lastToken(viewMode: .all),
     missingSyntaxNodes.contains(Syntax(firstToken)),
-    missingSyntaxNodes.contains(Syntax(lastToken))
+    missingSyntaxNodes.contains(Syntax(lastToken)),
+    nodes.only?.as(TokenSyntax.self)?.text != nil
   {
     if let nodeTypeName = commonAncestor.nodeTypeNameForDiagnostics(allowBlockNames: true) {
       return (commonAncestor, nodeTypeName)

CippoX · 2023-04-06T21:15:26Z

sure

CippoX · 2023-04-06T21:25:50Z

@ahoppen where is isIdentifierWithCustomName defined?

ahoppen · 2023-04-06T21:27:25Z

Oh, sorry, copy-pasted the wrong diff. It should have been

diff --git a/Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/MissingNodesError.swift b/Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/MissingNodesError.swift
index 9e17832a6..7faffba2d 100644
--- a/Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/MissingNodesError.swift
+++ b/Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/MissingNodesError.swift
@@ -112,13 +112,17 @@ func nodesDescription<SyntaxType: SyntaxProtocol>(_ nodes: [SyntaxType], format:
 func nodesDescriptionAndCommonParent<SyntaxType: SyntaxProtocol>(_ nodes: [SyntaxType], format: Bool) -> (commonAncestor: Syntax?, description: String) {
   let missingSyntaxNodes = nodes.map(Syntax.init)
 
  if let commonAncestor = findCommonAncestor(missingSyntaxNodes),
-  // If all tokens in the parent are missing, return the parent type name.
+  // If all tokens in the parent are missing, return the parent type name unless
+  // we are replacing by a single token that has explicit text, in which case we
+  // return that explicit text.
     commonAncestor.isMissingAllTokens,
     let firstToken = commonAncestor.firstToken(viewMode: .all),
     let lastToken = commonAncestor.lastToken(viewMode: .all),
     missingSyntaxNodes.contains(Syntax(firstToken)),
-    missingSyntaxNodes.contains(Syntax(lastToken))
+    missingSyntaxNodes.contains(Syntax(lastToken)),
+    nodes.only?.as(TokenSyntax.self)?.text != nil
   {
     if let nodeTypeName = commonAncestor.nodeTypeNameForDiagnostics(allowBlockNames: true) {
       return (commonAncestor, nodeTypeName)

CippoX · 2023-04-06T21:31:58Z

All done, and thanks for debugging it!

ahoppen · 2023-04-06T21:44:42Z

@swift-ci Please test

ahoppen · 2023-04-07T01:04:00Z

@swift-ci Please test

CippoX · 2023-04-07T08:14:03Z

Is testInvalid29 the test that was causing the issue? Because if I understood the log correctly and that's the problem, the bug seems to be caused by the way I've changed the ReplaceTokensFixIt function.

So I suggest checking if replacements contains one element and then providing the appropriate FixIt. The alternative would be restoring the old function and introducing a new function that takes multiple replacements.

ahoppen · 2023-04-07T16:58:23Z

Is testInvalid29 the test that was causing the issue? Because if I understood the log correctly and that's the problem, the bug seems to be caused by the way I've changed the ReplaceTokensFixIt function.

Yes, correct.

So I suggest checking if replacements contains one element and then providing the appropriate FixIt. The alternative would be restoring the old function and introducing a new function that takes multiple replacements.

I thought that’s essentially what I did with my diff but looks like I was wrong and didn’t run all tests to verify, sorry about that. I don’t think we should add a new function if you could investigate in finding some way to make the current one behave in both scenarios, that’d be great.

CippoX · 2023-04-07T17:35:31Z

@ahoppen I've pushed my idea, let me know

CippoX · 2023-04-07T23:35:02Z

I know my solution is very amateur, but it looks quite hard to change nodesDescriptionAndCommonParent without breaking something else.

ahoppen · 2023-04-11T21:18:10Z

I just looked into it further and it looks like my previous solution was really close, I just forgot to check for empty string instead of nil. The following diff should get all tests passing and has a generic implementation in nodesDescriptionAndCommonParent

diff --git a/Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/MissingNodesError.swift b/Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/MissingNodesError.swift
index b5f1215e..3e6b9f34 100644
--- a/Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/MissingNodesError.swift
+++ b/Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/MissingNodesError.swift
@@ -112,6 +112,13 @@ func nodesDescription<SyntaxType: SyntaxProtocol>(_ nodes: [SyntaxType], format:
 func nodesDescriptionAndCommonParent<SyntaxType: SyntaxProtocol>(_ nodes: [SyntaxType], format: Bool) -> (commonAncestor: Syntax?, description: String) {
   let missingSyntaxNodes = nodes.map(Syntax.init)
 
+  let isOnlyTokenWithNonMissingText: Bool
+  if let token = nodes.only?.as(TokenSyntax.self) {
+    isOnlyTokenWithNonMissingText = token.text != ""
+  } else {
+    isOnlyTokenWithNonMissingText = false
+  }
+
   // If all tokens in the parent are missing, return the parent type name unless
   // we are replacing by a single token that has explicit text, in which case we
   // return that explicit text.
@@ -120,7 +127,8 @@ func nodesDescriptionAndCommonParent<SyntaxType: SyntaxProtocol>(_ nodes: [Synta
     let firstToken = commonAncestor.firstToken(viewMode: .all),
     let lastToken = commonAncestor.lastToken(viewMode: .all),
     missingSyntaxNodes.contains(Syntax(firstToken)),
-    missingSyntaxNodes.contains(Syntax(lastToken))
+    missingSyntaxNodes.contains(Syntax(lastToken)),
+    !isOnlyTokenWithNonMissingText
   {
     if let nodeTypeName = commonAncestor.nodeTypeNameForDiagnostics(allowBlockNames: true) {
       return (commonAncestor, nodeTypeName)
diff --git a/Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/ParserDiagnosticMessages.swift b/Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/ParserDiagnosticMessages.swift
index 52198c2b..fd2af952 100644
--- a/Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/ParserDiagnosticMessages.swift
+++ b/Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/ParserDiagnosticMessages.swift
@@ -614,10 +614,6 @@ public struct ReplaceTokensFixIt: ParserFixIt {
   public let replacements: [TokenSyntax]
 
   public var message: String {
-    if replacements.count == 1 {
-      return "replace \(nodesDescription(replaceTokens, format: false)) with '\(replacements[0].text)'"
-    } else {
-      return "replace \(nodesDescription(replaceTokens, format: false)) with \(nodesDescription(replacements, format: false))"
-    }
+    return "replace \(nodesDescription(replaceTokens, format: false)) with \(nodesDescription(replacements, format: false))"
   }
 }

CippoX · 2023-04-12T10:19:42Z

Thanks!

ahoppen

Thank you. This looks great now!

ahoppen · 2023-04-12T19:54:31Z

@swift-ci Please test

ahoppen · 2023-04-12T22:55:37Z

@swift-ci Please test Windows

ahoppen · 2023-04-13T00:57:05Z

Looks like this PR raced with the one that changed replacement to replacements (I can’t find it right now). Could you rebase and make sure that everything builds locally?

kimdv · 2023-04-13T15:09:22Z

@swift-ci please test

CippoX · 2023-04-13T15:13:15Z

@kimdv please wait, looks there's something wrong 🥲

CippoX · 2023-04-13T15:27:53Z

Honestly, I'm not sure what happened, but everything seems to be fine now. I've also removed a warning introduced by my previous PR.

kimdv · 2023-04-13T16:23:34Z

@swift-ci please test

kimdv · 2023-04-13T16:23:50Z

Let's see what the CI says 🤞

ahoppen · 2023-04-13T18:02:49Z

@swift-ci Please test

CippoX · 2023-04-13T21:40:12Z

Finally 🎉

These parser failures were found by swiftlang#1340. - There was one round-trip failure introduced by swiftlang#1464 - A few cases were just consume tokens as the wrong child - The list of expected token kinds of `DeclModifierSynax` didn’t contain one modifier that was actually parsed

CippoX requested a review from ahoppen as a code owner March 29, 2023 12:54

ahoppen reviewed Mar 30, 2023

View reviewed changes

Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/SyntaxExtensions.swift Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/ParseDiagnosticsGenerator.swift Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/SyntaxExtensions.swift Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

ahoppen reviewed Mar 31, 2023

View reviewed changes

CippoX force-pushed the fixing-available-cannot-be-used-as-an-expression branch 2 times, most recently from 6367e1c to e7dc9a4 Compare April 5, 2023 15:30

CippoX requested a review from ahoppen April 5, 2023 15:35

ahoppen reviewed Apr 5, 2023

View reviewed changes

Sources/SwiftParser/Statements.swift Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Sources/SwiftParserDiagnostics/ParseDiagnosticsGenerator.swift Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

CippoX force-pushed the fixing-available-cannot-be-used-as-an-expression branch from af96c05 to 325f869 Compare April 6, 2023 10:00

CippoX requested a review from ahoppen April 6, 2023 10:00

ahoppen approved these changes Apr 6, 2023

View reviewed changes

CippoX force-pushed the fixing-available-cannot-be-used-as-an-expression branch from 325f869 to f602144 Compare April 6, 2023 16:53

CippoX force-pushed the fixing-available-cannot-be-used-as-an-expression branch from ba7db24 to f47c7b2 Compare April 6, 2023 21:30

CippoX force-pushed the fixing-available-cannot-be-used-as-an-expression branch from 2a9caa7 to a0fc474 Compare April 12, 2023 10:19

ahoppen approved these changes Apr 12, 2023

View reviewed changes

ahoppen enabled auto-merge April 12, 2023 19:54

auto-merge was automatically disabled April 13, 2023 15:04
Head branch was pushed to by a user without write access

CippoX force-pushed the fixing-available-cannot-be-used-as-an-expression branch from 7e927aa to 5457d5f Compare April 13, 2023 15:24

Fixed testAvailabilityQueryUnavailability34a

07fff06

CippoX force-pushed the fixing-available-cannot-be-used-as-an-expression branch from 5457d5f to 07fff06 Compare April 13, 2023 15:35

ahoppen enabled auto-merge April 13, 2023 18:02

ahoppen merged commit 357a3e6 into swiftlang:main Apr 13, 2023

ahoppen mentioned this pull request Apr 14, 2023

Fix parser failures found by source alteration in test cases #1538

Merged

CippoX mentioned this pull request Apr 14, 2023

Improved Diagnostic for C-style for loop #1540

Closed

Fixed testAvailabilityQueryUnavailability34a #1464

Fixed testAvailabilityQueryUnavailability34a #1464

Uh oh!

Conversation

CippoX commented Mar 29, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

CippoX commented Mar 31, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

CippoX commented Mar 31, 2023

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

CippoX commented Apr 5, 2023

Uh oh!

ahoppen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ahoppen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ahoppen commented Apr 6, 2023

Uh oh!

CippoX commented Apr 6, 2023

Uh oh!

ahoppen commented Apr 6, 2023

Uh oh!

ahoppen commented Apr 6, 2023

Uh oh!

CippoX commented Apr 6, 2023

Uh oh!

CippoX commented Apr 6, 2023

Uh oh!

ahoppen commented Apr 6, 2023

Uh oh!

CippoX commented Apr 6, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ahoppen commented Apr 6, 2023

Uh oh!

ahoppen commented Apr 7, 2023

Uh oh!

CippoX commented Apr 7, 2023

Uh oh!

ahoppen commented Apr 7, 2023

Uh oh!

CippoX commented Apr 7, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

CippoX commented Apr 7, 2023

Uh oh!

ahoppen commented Apr 11, 2023

Uh oh!

CippoX commented Apr 12, 2023

Uh oh!

ahoppen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ahoppen commented Apr 12, 2023

Uh oh!

ahoppen commented Apr 12, 2023

Uh oh!

ahoppen commented Apr 13, 2023

Uh oh!

kimdv commented Apr 13, 2023

Uh oh!

CippoX commented Apr 13, 2023

Uh oh!

CippoX commented Apr 13, 2023

Uh oh!

kimdv commented Apr 13, 2023

CippoX commented Mar 29, 2023 •

edited

Loading

CippoX commented Mar 31, 2023 •

edited

Loading

CippoX commented Apr 6, 2023 •

edited

Loading

CippoX commented Apr 7, 2023 •

edited

Loading