Updated string literal design based on #199 #732
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
zygoloid
approved these changes
Aug 11, 2021
Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <[email protected]>
jonmeow
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 12, 2021
Noticed this while working on #732, seemed easiest to split changes though.
zygoloid
reviewed
Aug 27, 2021
zygoloid
reviewed
Aug 27, 2021
zygoloid
approved these changes
Aug 27, 2021
Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <[email protected]>
jonmeow
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 30, 2021
This is based on discussion on #732: that we should probably parse the invalid whitespace, then reject it as part of string validation, rather than having different parses. I worry the question of "how is this parsed" may lead to subtly unexpected results if we aren't consistent, so I'm switching the logic from the lexer to the unescape library (and also adjusting the list of rejected whitespace).
chandlerc
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 28, 2022
Noticed this while working on #732, seemed easiest to split changes though.
chandlerc
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 28, 2022
I've modified the text from the proposal slightly, focusing the overview more on a design setup, but mostly kept the details. One important thing here is I noticed that raw tab characters are disallowed -- this was a little buried before, and I've now updated the list of characters allowed in a string to exclude tabs. Additionally, I've noted `\0D` in the list of escapes as explicitly invalid. Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <[email protected]>
chandlerc
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 28, 2022
This is based on discussion on #732: that we should probably parse the invalid whitespace, then reject it as part of string validation, rather than having different parses. I worry the question of "how is this parsed" may lead to subtly unexpected results if we aren't consistent, so I'm switching the logic from the lexer to the unescape library (and also adjusting the list of rejected whitespace).
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.
I've modified the text from the proposal slightly, focusing the overview more on a design setup, but mostly kept the details. One important thing here is I noticed that raw tab characters are disallowed -- this was a little buried before, and I've now updated the list of characters allowed in a string to exclude tabs. Additionally, I've noted
\0Din the list of escapes as explicitly invalid. Can you skim through this and make sure it seems like a reasonable change?