-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 111
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
Helper functions from previous API call outputs in next call too #323
Comments
I think this happen because |
Are there any API tests? In case I end up making a PR… |
- Self-hosted coffee compilation instead of dependency on (old version of) jashkenas/coffee-script. - No more `@variable`s for global variables and helper functions, which involves having to use `=>` instead of `->` sometimes. Now, just use `variable` like in plain JavaScript. - It is now possible to do `a:Foo? { a ?= []; rp a}` as expected. - Better error messages. Partly because CSR has better error messages than jashkenas/[email protected], partly because you also get to know in which rule the code resides. The error messages will get line and column numbers in the .pegcoffee file as soon as lydell/pegjs-each-code#1 is resolved. - No more weird hacks in the initializer. - Note: lib/parser.js gets pretty bloated because of michaelficarra#323.
- Self-hosted coffee compilation instead of dependency on (old version of) jashkenas/coffee-script. - No more `@variable`s for global variables and helper functions, which involves having to use `=>` instead of `->` sometimes. Now, just use `variable` like in plain JavaScript. - It is now possible to do `a:Foo? { a ?= []; rp a}` as expected. - Better error messages. Partly because CSR has better error messages than jashkenas/[email protected], partly because you also get to know in which rule the code resides. The error messages will get line and column numbers in the .pegcoffee file as soon as lydell/pegjs-each-code#1 is resolved. - No more weird hacks in the initializer. - Note: lib/parser.js gets pretty bloated because of michaelficarra#323.
Does it make sense to pass |
I don't think so. |
Then I don't know how to fix this issue :( |
Yeah, it's a shitty one. You can keep the state in the Compiler instance and mutate it there instead of threading it through the compilation rules. It's cleaner. Unfortunately, JavaScript/CoffeeScript do not allow for very powerful abstraction. |
I thought about keeping the state on the Compiler instance as well, but the rules don't seem to have access to it? |
Just found efaa09b:
|
Want to back this issue? Post a bounty on it! We accept bounties via Bountysource.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: