-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 875
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
TOML Cleanup and Improvements #4565
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
141 changes: 0 additions & 141 deletions
141
ide/languages.toml/src/org/netbeans/modules/languages/toml/TomlDataObject.java
This file was deleted.
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If I read the documentation correctly, we actually need buffering/seekability of the consumed stream (the documentation of CharStream declares this as required for lookahead), but the LexerInput already handles that - isn't it?
Reading further you actually buffer the whole file in memory, which kind of defeats the purpose of the
CharStream
implementation.getText
can only look back to places, that are protected by a mark, so the buffer is limited (assuming limited lookahead and marking).There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LexerInput
readText
,readLength
is scoped for the actual token being processed. CharStreamgetIndex
andgetText
are work on stream level. AlsogetText
is kind of an optional method. Fortunately it used in all Lexers. Just discovered to have a problem with the previos implementation on the Antlr lexer.I'm tempted to look around the Lexing API and probably add a more ANTLR friendly interface. Will, see. I do not think that this would be the final implementation. It is kind of good enough for now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Seeing, that ANTLR does not bother to implement its own interface (
ANTLRInputStream
) in an efficient way, I can't argue, that this implementation is inefficient, so ignore that.For the tempation to change the lexer API to be "ANTLR" friedly: before going there, make sure you have a very good reason, at some point ANTLR will go away and we will retain the fallout.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well, throwing out unmarked sections of StringBuilder could be implemented one day with mark supported.
Looked around the Lexing API yesterday. Accessing the underlying buffers is not as easy as I've thought.