-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 78
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
feat/error recovery robust field projection #2073
base: feat/error-recovery
Are you sure you want to change the base?
feat/error recovery robust field projection #2073
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## feat/error-recovery #2073 +/- ##
=====================================================
- Coverage 49% 49% -1%
+ Complexity 6605 6602 -3
=====================================================
Files 685 685
Lines 61148 61187 +39
Branches 8850 8862 +12
=====================================================
+ Hits 30239 30243 +4
- Misses 28706 28740 +34
- Partials 2203 2204 +1 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
… that "is" operator and others work on error trees. This does reserve the constructor name "recovered" for use in error versions..
This PR now also covers
|
This experiment makes parse tree instances (ITree's in Java) which happen to have error productions robust again field projection (in the interpreter)
Of course further field projection on such a stub would not work anymore, because there is no more production to work with. So this gives only one layer of robustness. A future version of this could recursively keep returning empty error stubs, but I don't know how to obtain the right type for those trees from the interpreter.
The questions are:
hasError
checks?At the very least field projection should work for fields which are before the dot. The rest is open for discussion I think.