[BUGFIX] Allow comma-separated arguments in selectors #1292
Conversation
|
This is rough and ready, though fixes #1289. I have no idea why an additional fix for comment parsing seems to be required. I expect judicious review, and that this PR needs to be split because of the curious comment-parsing bug (why is nothing ever easy?). Anyhow, we're on the road to sorting this. |
JakeQZ
force-pushed
the
bugfix/comma
branch
2 times, most recently
from
8626ec3 to
5705132
Compare
src/Parsing/ParserState.php
Outdated
| @@ -345,6 +345,10 @@ public function consumeUntil( | |||
| $start = $this->currentPosition; | |||
|
|
|||
| while (!$this->isEnd()) { | |||
| $comment = $this->consumeComment(); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should cover this with a test.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, it's a bit mysterious why the bug this is fixing suddenly reared it's head with this change. Will need investigating as a separate issue.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So how should we proceed here? Fix that bug first and then continue here? Or merge this PR first and than fix that bug (and cover it with tests)?
I tend to prefer the first, but am not completely sure.
WDYT?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The comment parsing bugfix seems to be needed for this PR (though I don't yet understand why), so it would need to be done first if it really is required for this change to work.
- Assign the result of `ParserState::peek()` to a local variable, for efficiency; - Use a switch statement to branch on its value, for extensibility (e.g. #1292); - Don't unnecessarily test that a quote character is not escaped when not within a string.
- Assign the result of `ParserState::peek()` to a local variable, for efficiency; - Use a switch statement to branch on its value, for extensibility (e.g. #1292); - Don't unnecessarily test that a quote character is not escaped when not within a string.
|
This PR now needs a rebase. Apart from that, is it ready for a re-review, or does it need any other changes first? |
Have rebased. The mysterious issue with comment consumption still needs to be resolved... |
|
About the commit message: The |
It the docs are correct, they can be on the same line, but do need to be written out individually. However, I think it's more readable if they are on separate lines, given the format I originally used won't work. I've amended the original commit. |
I've found that this arose because this PR changes consumption behaviour to consume the first character after the selector separator ( The "Number 4" comment (here) is then the next thing It so happens that there is a space after the comma, which if not pre-consumed, would allow |
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
Also remove fix for `consumeUntil` bug, which #1320 will address.
This is now fixed. I think the I think it would be possible to apply the change regarding |
Co-authored-by: Oliver Klee <[email protected]>
|
I've addressed all comments so far. But I think there's a bit of a "smell" in the tests which have "parses and returns" in a single test.
I'm increasingly thinking this would be a good approach, if only to separate the changes into manageable chunks. |
I'm confused - "this" (the good approach) is "having one more pre-patch" or "merging this PR first and then having a follow-up PR"? |
Having another pre-PR to move the splitting of separators at commas into |
Fixes #138.
Fixes #360.
Fixes #1289.