Fix block parsing #228
Merged
Fix block parsing #228
+68
−63
Conversation
This file contains 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
raehik
approved these changes
Jun 22, 2022
|
Cheers for this. I had felt the previous design was a bit of a code smell, swapping |
RaoulHC
force-pushed
the
raoul/fix-block-parsing
branch
from
cbad1a6 to
8383e94
Compare
|
Removed that snoc and comment, looks like I was the person to add it in the first place. |
The way it currently worked meant it would fail to parse includes that didn't end with a newline, which is valid. To allow this the block parsing had to be reorganized, with the block parser not expecting trailing newlines, but otherwise behaves the same.
RaoulHC
force-pushed
the
raoul/fix-block-parsing
branch
from
8383e94 to
78f5211
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The way it currently worked meant it would fail to parse includes that
didn't end with a newline, which is valid. To allow this the block
parsing had to be reorganized, with the block parser not expecting
trailing newlines, but otherwise behaves the same.
We might want to do this for other parsers, but because they currently
don't expand includes, it's not actually a problem for them.