Updates for Swift 5.1 #1332
Merged
Updates for Swift 5.1 #1332
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
…le` key path syntax.
pyrmont
reviewed
Sep 16, 2019
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason the values in the case statements are matching inconsistently looks like it's being caused by .c matching as a function. I'm having a look through this lexer and it could use some tightening up. I think I'll open a separate issue for that and we can work on both things in parallel.
pyrmont
added
author-action
pyrmont
removed
the
author-action
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This adds three things:
somekeyword from Swift 5.1.\.TypeName.propertyName.The demo document shows that in
case .value?:the.valueisn't actually captured as a variable name, unlike the plaincase .value:variant. It looks like the rule on line 120 should capture this, but my regex-fu is somewhat rusty and I've not actually delved into the rouge API enough to get a deep understanding of exactly what I'm seeing here. Any suggestions to solve that particular issue would be greatly appreciated.