Add parsing for the with-expression form #42304
Conversation
| @@ -9091,6 +9093,10 @@ private ExpressionSyntax ParseExpressionContinued(ExpressionSyntax leftOperand, | |||
| { | |||
| opKind = SyntaxKind.SwitchExpression; | |||
| } | |||
| else if (tk == SyntaxKind.WithKeyword && this.PeekToken(1).Kind == SyntaxKind.OpenBraceToken) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
do you even need the open brace? it couldn't be legal otherwise, right? so maybe just try to parse here and say that the { is missing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe? I don't know. I can't think of how it would be ambiguous, but maybe I'm just not thinking of something :)
agocke
force-pushed
the
with-expr
branch
4 times, most recently
from
3f97fca
to
d18582b
Compare
| <Kind Name="OpenBraceToken"/> | ||
| </Field> | ||
| <!-- PROTOTYPE: This is the same syntax as for an anonymous object creation, but do we want to share the nodes? --> | ||
| <Field Name="Initializers" Type="SeparatedSyntaxList<AnonymousObjectMemberDeclaratorSyntax>" AllowTrailingSeparator="true" /> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Have you considered nested withers? Something like:
record with { Owner = { Name = "name" } } ->
record.With(owner: record.Owner.With(name: "name"))
Also, it seems like collections could use some help, we already have this pattern:
node with { ArgList = { Args = { 1 } } } ->
node.With(argList: node.ArgList.With(args: node.ArgList.Args.Add(1))
though with that syntax it's not clear if we want Add or a complete replacement.
edit: in fact, if we wanted a replacement, we could say { Args = new .. } that's exactly how collection initializers work today.
So I think it would be actually more similar to object/collection initializers, at least syntactically.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nested withers is a neat idea, but out of scope for this PR, I think. We would have to discuss it and approve it in the design meeting.
| @@ -23,219 +23,6 @@ protected override SyntaxTree ParseTree(string text, CSharpParseOptions options) | |||
| return SyntaxFactory.ParseSyntaxTree(text, options ?? TestOptions.Regular); | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| [Fact] | |||
| public void RecordParsing01() | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
RecordParsing01 [](start = 20, length = 15)
Why delete these tests? #Resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Woops, did not mean to, just meant to consolidate into a single file. Re-added. #Resolved
|
Finished review (Iteration 1) #Resolved |
Relates to #40726 (test plan for records)