Add Token::Kind#unary_operator?#14342
Merged
straight-shoota merged 1 commit intocrystal-lang:masterfrom Mar 6, 2024
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
|
I think the integration would just be: module Crystal
class ToSVisitor
def visit(node : Not)
visit_call Call.new(node.obj, "!")
end
end
endNot the fastest code ever, but the formatter does a similar thing all over the place (e.g. |
Member
Author
|
I don't think The challenge is that there's no token in |
HertzDevil
approved these changes
Mar 5, 2024
1 task
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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 is a tiny refactor to merge two duplicate definitions of unary operators into a predicate method of
Token::Kind.Also simplifies the handling of unary operators in prefix notation in the formatter.
There's another similar definition in
ToSVisitor::UNARY_OPERATORSbut it's based on method name, not token type. This is practically not very relevant, but it's not trivial to integrate into one. So I think it's fine to keep this duplication, but I've added cross-references between the two.