Skip to content
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

add broken test for pipe completion on aliased types #700

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jan 18, 2023

Conversation

zth
Copy link
Collaborator

@zth zth commented Jan 15, 2023

Pipe completion does not work on aliased types. Wondering what the best way would be to make it work.

@zth zth requested a review from cristianoc January 15, 2023 22:00
@cristianoc
Copy link
Collaborator

It needs to start from the type environment and expand the definition.

Copy link
Collaborator

@cristianoc cristianoc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice one!

| Tlink t1 | Tsubst t1 | Tpoly (t1, []) ->
digToRelevantType ~env ~package t1
(* Don't descend into types named "t". Type t is a convention in the ReScript ecosystem. *)
| Tconstr (path, _, _) when path |> Path.last = "t" -> (env, TypExpr t)
Copy link
Collaborator

@cristianoc cristianoc Jan 18, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What happens in practice if this case is omitted?
I was thinking of the different cases. E.g. when it's an alias to array, whether one wants to complete for array. And when it's a record definition, then one wants to treat is as the source of truth.
Just thinking aloud here, about what the convention could look like.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, I added this case because it broke 2 tests in Completion.res, and looking at them I felt like the old behavior was better.

Yeah, I agree. I don't feel like there's a clear and good answer here, but I do lean a bit towards the current behavior, as in type t usually means the main type, and if it's in a module there's often functions in the module to work on it. But I agree it's not 100%.

One idea could be to complete for the module with the type t, and the aliased value. Unsure if that'd be messy to implement, but it might be good behavior. What do you think?

Merging since it doesn't change current behavior.

@zth zth merged commit e7bd5ed into master Jan 18, 2023
@zth zth deleted the pipe-completion-aliases branch January 18, 2023 17:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants