Handle @canonical tags in the top-comment of signatures #662
Conversation
test/xref2/canonical_unit.t/run.t
Outdated
| $ compile test__x.mli test.ml | ||
| File "test.ml", line 15, characters 6-24: | ||
| Unexpected tag '@canonical' at this location. | ||
| $ compile test__x.mli test__y.ml test.ml |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The scope of this test increases and will conflict with #653. Perhaps at this point, we could test every canonical features in one larger test case ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
could do, though I'd still prefer to try to test canonical on it's own rather than in conjunction with hidden, as there is some overlap in how they both work. Obviously we want to test them together as well, just in a different test -- perhaps a 'namespaces' test.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Alright, I'll remove the "hidden" part of this test to turn it into a general canonical test. The combination with hidden modules is tested in the ocaml_stdlib.t, we might want to have a bigger "wrapped_library" test too.
|
This looks good, just needs a rebase. |
Previously, @canonical tags were allowed to be attached to module, module type and type declarations and in the top-comment of compilation units. This handles @canonical tags in the top-comment of signatures and structures.
|
Just rebased. I kept the "Cleanup canonical tests" commit but I'm not sure it makes sense since the recent changes on master. |
2 participants
Previously,
@canonicaltags were allowed to be attached to module, module type and type declarations and in the top-comment of compilation units.This handles
@canonicaltags in the top-comment of signatures and structures, for example: