Jk/preserve unparsable input #227
Merged
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
wojciechczerniak
suggested changes
Mar 1, 2020
swistak35
reviewed
Mar 1, 2020
| const vertex = buildMatrixVertex(parseResult.ast as ProcedureAst, address) | ||
| dependencies.set(vertex, absolutizeDependencies(parseResult.dependencies, address)) | ||
| this.dependencyGraph.addMatrixVertex(address, vertex) | ||
| if (parseResult.errors.length > 0) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Instead of such checks, couldn't we make this.parser.parse(...) return some object representing the result of parsing? Something like if (parseResult.isCorrectlyParsed()) would be nicer
| @@ -941,7 +943,13 @@ export class HyperFormula { | |||
| if (!(parsedCellContent instanceof CellContent.Formula)) { | |||
| return [false, exampleTemporaryFormulaAddress] | |||
| } | |||
| const {ast} = this.parser.parse(parsedCellContent.formula, exampleTemporaryFormulaAddress) | |||
|
|
|||
| const { ast, errors } = this.parser.parse(parsedCellContent.formula, exampleTemporaryFormulaAddress) | |||
| @@ -60,6 +63,10 @@ import { | |||
| WhiteSpace, | |||
| } from './LexerConfig' | |||
|
|
|||
| export interface FormulaParserResult { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wouldn't it be a lot simpler if we would have two different result classes? One having ONLY ast and one having ONLY errors? Because now we have to do all these ErrorAst sheningans just to have the Ast, but we don't need Ast anymore, as we don't store unparsable formulas in FormulaVertex (which needed an Ast), but in ParserErrorVertex instead. Do I think correctly?
| } | ||
| const {ast, hasVolatileFunction, hasStructuralChangeFunction, relativeDependencies} = cacheResult | ||
|
|
||
| return {ast, hasVolatileFunction, hasStructuralChangeFunction, dependencies: relativeDependencies} | ||
| return {ast, errors: [], hasVolatileFunction, hasStructuralChangeFunction, dependencies: relativeDependencies} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 for having separate field for that
Co-Authored-By: Wojciech Czerniak <wojciech.czerniak@gmail.com>
wojciechczerniak
approved these changes
Mar 2, 2020
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.
Context
Introduces new vertex type
ParsingErrorVertexwhich stores original user input.FormulaCellVertexis not constructed if parsing error occures.Instead of returning
ErrorType.NAME, parsing errors are represented asErrorType.ERRORwhich corresponds to generic#ERROR!.How has this been tested?
Types of changes
Related issue(s):
Checklist: