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

Grouping methods in ExprTycker #1021

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Dec 9, 2023
Merged

Grouping methods in ExprTycker #1021

merged 5 commits into from
Dec 9, 2023

Conversation

HoshinoTented
Copy link
Contributor

This PR groups methods in ExprTycker.

@HoshinoTented HoshinoTented added this to the v0.30 milestone Dec 8, 2023
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 8, 2023

Codecov Report

Attention: 11 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (7d69832) 81.78% compared to head (76775f6) 81.85%.
Report is 9 commits behind head on main.

Files Patch % Lines
base/src/main/java/org/aya/tyck/ExprTycker.java 91.40% 5 Missing and 6 partials ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #1021      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     81.78%   81.85%   +0.07%     
+ Complexity     3471     3441      -30     
============================================
  Files           287      287              
  Lines         10640    10638       -2     
  Branches       1281     1284       +3     
============================================
+ Hits           8702     8708       +6     
+ Misses         1216     1207       -9     
- Partials        722      723       +1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@HoshinoTented HoshinoTented merged commit 247390f into main Dec 9, 2023
6 checks passed
@HoshinoTented HoshinoTented deleted the cp-from-995 branch December 9, 2023 19:27
@ice1000
Copy link
Member

ice1000 commented Dec 9, 2023

Thank you! 🙏

Comment on lines +172 to +176
return lhsResult.preclause.expr().map(e -> {// In case the patterns are malformed, do not check the body
// as we bind local variables in the pattern checker,
// and in case the patterns are malformed, some bindings may
// not be added to the localCtx of tycker, causing assertion errors
return lhsResult.hasError ? new ErrorTerm(e, false) : exprTycker.inherit(e, lhsResult.type).wellTyped();
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code formatting seems broken

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

😱

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants