Rename haschildren() to is_leaf()
#483
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
Unfortunately, `haschildren(x)` was a terrible name because it's not testing the same thing as `numchildren(x) == 0`! In our ASTs * Leaves of the tree correspond to tokens in the source text * Internal nodes are containers for a range of tokens or other internal nodes. Occasionally we can have internal nodes which have no tokens and thus have `numchildren(node) == 0`. These are, however, still "internal nodes" and we have `haschildren(node) === true` for these which makes no sense!
c42f
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2024
Here I commit to a more consistent but simpler child access API for syntax trees, as informed by the JuliaLowering work so far: * `is_leaf(node)` is given a precise definition (previously `!haschildren()` - but that had issues - see #483) * `children(node)` returns the child list, or `nothing` if there are no children. The `nothing` might be seen as inconvenient, but mapping across the children of a leaf node is probably an error and one should probably branch on `is_leaf` first. * `numchildren(node)` is documented * `node[i]`, `node[i:j]` are documented to index into the child list We distinguish `GreenNode` and its implementation of `span` from `SyntaxNode` and its implementation of `byte_range` and `sourcetext` - these seem to just have very different APIs, at least as of now. I've deleted the questionable overloads of multidimensional `getindex` and the `child` function in favor of single dimensional getindex. I don't know whether anyone ever ended up using these. But I didn't and they didn't seem useful+consistent enough to keep the complexity. I've kept setindex! for now, to set a child of a `SyntaxNode`. Though I'm not sure this is a good idea to support by default.
c42f
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2024
Here I commit to a more consistent but simpler child access API for syntax trees, as informed by the JuliaLowering work so far: * `is_leaf(node)` is given a precise definition (previously `!haschildren()` - but that had issues - see #483) * `children(node)` returns the child list, or `nothing` if there are no children. The `nothing` might be seen as inconvenient, but mapping across the children of a leaf node is probably an error and one should probably branch on `is_leaf` first. * `numchildren(node)` is documented * `node[i]`, `node[i:j]` are documented to index into the child list We distinguish `GreenNode` and its implementation of `span` from `SyntaxNode` and its implementation of `byte_range` and `sourcetext` - these seem to just have very different APIs, at least as of now. I've deleted the questionable overloads of multidimensional `getindex` and the `child` function in favor of single dimensional getindex. I don't know whether anyone ever ended up using these. But I didn't and they didn't seem useful+consistent enough to keep the complexity. I've kept setindex! for now, to set a child of a `SyntaxNode`. Though I'm not sure this is a good idea to support by default.
c42f
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 9, 2024
Here I commit to a more consistent but simpler child access API for syntax trees, as informed by the JuliaLowering work so far: * `is_leaf(node)` is given a precise definition (previously `!haschildren()` - but that had issues - see #483) * `children(node)` returns the child list, or `nothing` if there are no children. The `nothing` might be seen as inconvenient, but mapping across the children of a leaf node is probably an error and one should probably branch on `is_leaf` first. * `numchildren(node)` is documented * `node[i]`, `node[i:j]` are documented to index into the child list We distinguish `GreenNode` and its implementation of `span` from `SyntaxNode` and its implementation of `byte_range` and `sourcetext` - these seem to just have very different APIs, at least as of now. I've deleted the questionable overloads of multidimensional `getindex` and the `child` function in favor of single dimensional getindex. I don't know whether anyone ever ended up using these. But I didn't and they didn't seem useful+consistent enough to keep the complexity. I've kept setindex! for now, to set a child of a `SyntaxNode`. Though I'm not sure this is a good idea to support by default.
c42f
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 9, 2024
Here I commit to a more consistent but simpler child access API for syntax trees, as informed by the JuliaLowering work so far: * `is_leaf(node)` is given a precise definition (previously `!haschildren()` - but that had issues - see #483) * `children(node)` returns the child list, or `nothing` if there are no children. The `nothing` might be seen as inconvenient, but mapping across the children of a leaf node is probably an error and one should probably branch on `is_leaf` first. * `numchildren(node)` is documented * `node[i]`, `node[i:j]` are documented to index into the child list We distinguish `GreenNode` and its implementation of `span` from `SyntaxNode` and its implementation of `byte_range` and `sourcetext` - these seem to just have very different APIs, at least as of now. I've deleted the questionable overloads of multidimensional `getindex` and the `child` function in favor of single dimensional getindex. I don't know whether anyone ever ended up using these. But I didn't and they didn't seem useful+consistent enough to keep the complexity. I've kept setindex! for now, to set a child of a `SyntaxNode`. Though I'm not sure this is a good idea to support by default.
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.
Unfortunately,
haschildren(x)was a terrible name because it's not testing the same thing asnumchildren(x) == 0!In our ASTs
Occasionally we can have internal nodes which have no tokens and thus have
numchildren(node) == 0. These are, however, still "internal nodes" and we havehaschildren(node) === truefor these which makes no sense!