-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.5k
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
Handle infix operators in REPL completion #51366
Merged
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
Liozou
added
REPL
Julia's REPL (Read Eval Print Loop)
backport 1.10
Change should be backported to the 1.10 release
labels
Sep 18, 2023
Liozou
force-pushed
the
replcompleteinfix
branch
from
September 18, 2023 09:51
6323e6b
to
163391c
Compare
Liozou
force-pushed
the
replcompleteinfix
branch
from
October 3, 2023 08:09
163391c
to
53c99ed
Compare
oscardssmith
reviewed
Oct 3, 2023
KristofferC
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 12, 2023
Fix #51194 This PR fixes a regression introduced in #49294, so I believe it should be backported to v1.10. In the current code, completion of `qux(foo, bar.` is detected by parsing `foo(qux, bar` as an incomplete expression, and then looking for the sub-expression to complete (here, `bar.`). This approach fails however for infix calls, since completing `foo + bar.` starts by parsing `foo + bar`, which is a complete call expression, and so the code behaves as if completing `(foo + bar).` instead of `bar.`. This leads to the current problematic behaviour: ```julia julia> Complex(1, 3) + (4//5).#TAB im re ``` which would be correct for `(Complex(1, 3) + (4//5)).#TAB`, but here we expect ```julia julia> Complex(1, 3) + (4//5).#TAB den num ``` This PR fixes that by trying to detect infix calls. In the long term, all this ad-hoc and probably somewhat wrong string processing should be replaced by proper use of `JuliaSyntax` (as mentioned in #49294 (comment), #50817 (comment) and probably other places), but for now at least this fixes the regression. (cherry picked from commit e949236)
KristofferC
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 2, 2023
Backported PRs: - [x] #50932 <!-- types: fix hash values of Vararg --> - [x] #50975 <!-- Use rr-safe `nopl; rdtsc` sequence --> - [x] #50989 <!-- fix incorrect results in `expm1(::Union{Float16, Float32})` --> - [x] #51284 <!-- Avoid infinite loop when doing SIGTRAP in arm64-apple --> - [x] #51332 <!-- Add s4 field to Xoshiro --> - [x] #51397 <!-- call Pkg precompile hook in latest world --> - [x] #51405 <!-- Remove fallback that assigns a module to inlined frames. --> - [x] #51491 <!-- Throw clearer ArgumentError for strip with two string args --> - [x] #51531 <!-- fix `_tryonce_download_from_cache` (busybox.exe download error) --> - [x] #51541 <!-- Fix string index error in tab completion code --> - [x] #51530 <!-- Don't mark nonlocal symbols as hidden --> - [x] #51557 <!-- Fix last startup & shutdown precompiles --> - [x] #51512 <!-- avoid limiting Type{Any} to Type --> - [x] #51595 <!-- reset `maxprobe` on `empty!` --> - [x] #51582 <!-- Aggressive constprop in LinearAlgebra.wrap --> - [x] #51592 <!-- correctly track element pointer in heap snapshot --> - [x] #51326 <!-- complete false & true more generally as vals --> - [x] #51376 <!-- make `hash(::Xoshiro)` compatible with `==` --> - [x] #51557 <!-- Fix last startup & shutdown precompiles --> - [x] #51845 - [x] #51840 - [x] #50663 <!-- Fix Expr(:loopinfo) codegen --> - [x] #51863 <!-- LLVM 15.0.7-9 --> Contains multiple commits, manual intervention needed: - [ ] #51035 <!-- refactor GC scanning code to reflect jl_binding_t are now first class --> - [ ] #51092 <!-- inference: fix bad effects for recursion --> Non-merged PRs with backport label: - [ ] #51479 <!-- prevent code loading from lookin in the versioned environment when building Julia --> - [ ] #51414 <!-- improvements on GC scheduler shutdown --> - [ ] #51366 <!-- Handle infix operators in REPL completion --> - [ ] #50919 <!-- Code loading: do the "skipping mtime check for stdlib" check regardless of the value of `ispath(f)` --> - [ ] #50824 <!-- Add some aliasing warnings to docstrings for mutating functions in Base --> - [ ] #49805 <!-- Limit TimeType subtraction to AbstractDateTime -->
KristofferC
removed
the
backport 1.10
Change should be backported to the 1.10 release
label
Nov 6, 2023
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.
Fix #51194
This PR fixes a regression introduced in #49294, so I believe it should be backported to v1.10.
In the current code, completion of
qux(foo, bar.
is detected by parsingfoo(qux, bar
as an incomplete expression, and then looking for the sub-expression to complete (here,bar.
). This approach fails however for infix calls, since completingfoo + bar.
starts by parsingfoo + bar
, which is a complete call expression, and so the code behaves as if completing(foo + bar).
instead ofbar.
. This leads to the current problematic behaviour:which would be correct for
(Complex(1, 3) + (4//5)).#TAB
, but here we expectThis PR fixes that by trying to detect infix calls. In the long term, all this ad-hoc and probably somewhat wrong string processing should be replaced by proper use of
JuliaSyntax
(as mentioned in #49294 (comment), #50817 (comment) and probably other places), but for now at least this fixes the regression.