Rule: unused-output-variable
#922
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
One of the rules I've wanted since the project was started, but not until now would this have been wildly expensive to add. With the recent fixes that allow us to reuse the result of `walk`ing the AST, that's no longer the case. Still, this required quite some time and effort to get right! NOTE: this rule currently only considers output variables as found in references, i.e. `x` in `input[x]` and NOT `x` in `some x, _ in input`. While that would be easy to add, I'm not sure if those are really "output variables" or should be considered as such... 🤔 or if we should just have another rules for "unused iteration variable" or something like that. Either way, this is a big step forward! Fixes #60 Signed-off-by: Anders Eknert <[email protected]>
charlieegan3
approved these changes
Jul 17, 2024
|
@srenatus I’d love to hear your thoughts on my note above! Am I right in my hunch that “x” in “some x in y” isn’t an “output variable” in the unification sense? |
|
|
srenatus
pushed a commit
to srenatus/regal
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 1, 2024
One of the rules I've wanted since the project was started, but not until now would this have been wildly expensive to add. With the recent fixes that allow us to reuse the result of `walk`ing the AST, that's no longer the case. Still, this required quite some time and effort to get right! NOTE: this rule currently only considers output variables as found in references, i.e. `x` in `input[x]` and NOT `x` in `some x, _ in input`. While that would be easy to add, I'm not sure if those are really "output variables" or should be considered as such... 🤔 or if we should just have another rules for "unused iteration variable" or something like that. Either way, this is a big step forward! Fixes StyraInc#60 Signed-off-by: Anders Eknert <[email protected]>
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.
One of the rules I've wanted since the project was started, but until now would this have been wildly expensive to add. With the recent fixes that allow us to reuse the result of
walking the AST, that's no longer the case. Still, this required quite some time and effort to get right!NOTE: this rule currently only considers output variables as found in references, i.e.
xininput[x]and NOTxinsome x, _ in input. While that would be easy to add, I'm not sure if those are really "output variables" or should be considered as such... 🤔 or if we should just have another rules for "unused iteration variable" or something like that. Either way, this is a big step forward!Fixes #60