🖊️ Allow -= and > operators to be used independently when merging grammars #5186
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
jpelay
approved these changes
Feb 29, 2024
| @@ -0,0 +1,102 @@ | |||
| import unittest | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you so much for adding tests for this feature!!
| remove_arg = op_to_arg.get(REMOVE_GRAMMAR_MERGE_OP, '') | ||
| last_arg = op_to_arg.get(LAST_GRAMMAR_MERGE_OP, '') | ||
| remaining_commands = get_remaining_rules(prev_definition, remove_arg, last_arg) | ||
| ordered_commands = split_rule(remaining_commands, add_arg, last_arg) |
|
Thank you for contributing! Your pull request is now going on the merge train (choo choo! Do not click update from main anymore, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork). |
|
Thank you for contributing! Your pull request is now going on the merge train (choo choo! Do not click update from main anymore, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork). |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Fixes #5176
Merging grammar rules was only possible if the += operator was present, which means that the -= and > operators could not be used independently of +=. With this change, all operators could be used independently of each other.
Because the > operator now does not need the context of the += operator, I had to change it to a symbol which does not appear in the lark language (e.g. ->). Please consider whether there is a better candidate than
>>, for example>=?How to test