Skip to content
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

Remove imprecise T_IDENTIFIER capture groups, leading to simpler token sequences #258

Conversation

Ocramius
Copy link
Member

@Ocramius Ocramius commented Mar 25, 2019

Note: I just need a review - will forward-port after that.

Discovered while working on #257

A T_IDENTIFIER represents:

  • a constant
  • a function name
  • a function name prefixed with \
  • a class name
  • a class name prefixed with \
  • a class constant
  • a class constant, with class name prefixed with \

The current capturing regular expression is too simplistic, and it
leads to edge cases where Foo\42.5 are captured as separate tokens.

In this patch, we deprecate DocLexer::T_NAMESPACE_SEPARATOR (which
shouldn't be looked up directly anymore), and tell the parser to work
with wider T_IDENTIFIER tokens instead.

Note that a test is also being removed. That is intentional, since the
test verifies a parser issue when parsing @Foo\3.42:

  • previously, the tokens would be [@ Foo\3.42]
  • now they are [@, Foo, \, 3.42]

This also means that the above will be parsed as @Foo.

A `T_IDENTIFIER` represents:

 * a constant
 * a function name
 * a function name prefixed with `\`
 * a class name
 * a class name prefixed with `\`
 * a class constant
 * a class constant, with class name prefixed with `\`

The current capturing regular expression is too simplistic, and it
leads to edge cases where `Foo\42.5` are captured as separate tokens.

In this patch, we deprecate `DocLexer::T_NAMESPACE_SEPARATOR` (which
shouldn't be looked up directly anymore), and tell the parser to work
with wider `T_IDENTIFIER` tokens instead.

Note that a test is also being removed. That is intentional, since the
test verifies a parser issue when parsing `@Foo\3.42`:

 * previously, the tokens would be `[@ Foo\3.42]`
 * now they are `[@, Foo, \, 3.42]`

This also means that the above will be parsed as `@Foo`.
Copy link
Member

@nicolas-grekas nicolas-grekas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Makes sense (+ would fix a deprecation that blocks Symfony's CI on PHP 7.4 :) )

@@ -988,18 +988,7 @@ private function Identifier()

$this->lexer->moveNext();

$className = $this->lexer->token['value'];

while ($this->lexer->lookahead['position'] === ($this->lexer->token['position'] + strlen($this->lexer->token['value']))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

because lookahead can be null here, this line triggers a deprecation on 7.4
that's one of the main remaining blockers we have to make Symfony's tests pass on PHP 7.4 :)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@guilhermeblanco let's separate the concern of fixing 7.4 compat and the issue found with this patch: we should check for the lookahead to exist in this while(), and have a test that triggers a deprecation warning on 7.4

@Tobion
Copy link
Contributor

Tobion commented Aug 6, 2019

Fixes #273

* @expectedException \Doctrine\Common\Annotations\AnnotationException
* @expectedExceptionMessage [Syntax Error] Expected Doctrine\Common\Annotations\DocLexer::T_IDENTIFIER or Doctrine\Common\Annotations\DocLexer::T_TRUE or Doctrine\Common\Annotations\DocLexer::T_FALSE or Doctrine\Common\Annotations\DocLexer::T_NULL, got '3.42' at position 5.
*/
public function testInvalidIdentifierInAnnotation()
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Urgh, I shouldn't have removed this test. It should at least have a test declaring another sort of failure here.

@guilhermeblanco
Copy link
Member

As agreed, we decided to take a simplified approach and only resolve the 7.4 notice instead.
This patch is now considered invalid. Closing.

@alcaeus alcaeus removed this from the v1.7.0 milestone Aug 8, 2019
@alcaeus alcaeus removed the request for review from Majkl578 August 8, 2019 18:06
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants