Improve docs #265
Improve docs #265
Conversation
`RuboCop::ProcessedSource` is from `rubocop`.
| * it will match `sum(2.0, 3)`, as the first argument is of a `float` type | ||
| * it will not match `sum(2, 3)`, as the first argument is of an `int` type | ||
|
|
||
| NOTE: Negation operator works with other node pattern syntax elements, `{}`, `[]`, `()`, `$`, but not with `<>`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm uncertain if this is intentional.
(send nil? :foo <int ...>) would work to match a foo call with at least one integer literal.
(send nil? :foo !<int ...>) would not work to match a foo call with no literal integer arguments. Is there a more canonical way to achieve that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually it's more complex than that. You can negate a pattern that targets a single element (e.g. !{int | sym}) but not other pattern (e.g. !{int int | sym sym}).
Not sure why you wrote it doesn't work with $
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Got it.
I understand that with variable number of elements like {int | sym sym} and <int ...> it's an easily justifiable behaviour.
I guess (send _ !<true false>) is more tricky due to the hidden number of elements ambiguity? It seems like it would match if there are no arguments (foo()), a single non-boolean argument (foo(1)), and multiple arguments as well, which just would open space for more confusion.
Not sure why you wrote it doesn't work with
$
Because I didn't! 😄
Thanks for the clarification! I've updated this section.
| * it will match `sum(2.0, 3)`, as the first argument is of a `float` type | ||
| * it will not match `sum(2, 3)`, as the first argument is of an `int` type | ||
|
|
||
| NOTE: Negation operator works with other node pattern syntax elements, `{}`, `[]`, `()`, `$`, but not with `<>`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually it's more complex than that. You can negate a pattern that targets a single element (e.g. !{int | sym}) but not other pattern (e.g. !{int int | sym sym}).
Not sure why you wrote it doesn't work with $
pirj
force-pushed
the
add-sequence-introduction
branch
3 times, most recently
from
1788b18
to
e2a6fa5
Compare
Without `--legacy`, it would return `kwargs`, not `hash`:
(send
(const nil :Comment) :new
(kwargs
(pair
(sym :user)
(send nil :current_user))))
pirj
force-pushed
the
add-sequence-introduction
branch
from
075a1f2
to
02d78f0
Compare
This:
fixes #228