-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 69
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: add Scala 3 keywords #161
Merged
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
Based on [the docs](https://dotty.epfl.ch/docs/internals/syntax.html). 1. Scala 3 is not perfectly backwards compatible, but is significantly backwards compatible, with Scala 2. Therefore, it seems reasonable at a syntax level to begin with the assumption that they are sufficiently compatible that we can just start migrating towards the grammar of Scala 3. 2. Scala 3 has reserved more keywords. Arguably it's a benefit, even if you are writing Scala 2 code, to be made aware of the Scala 3 keywords by way of syntax highlighting. That way you have an opportunity to rename your variables before ever upgrading to 3. 3. The lack of highlighting new keywords is probably the most obvious lack of highlighting w.r.t. to the new syntax; i.e., this is a "do 20%, get 80%" scenario. Overall this seems to me like a fairly simple and safe step toward adopting Scala 3 syntax.
hvesalai
reviewed
Jul 27, 2020
enzief
reviewed
Jul 27, 2020
smarter
approved these changes
Sep 20, 2020
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.
LGTM, it would be nice to see this merged!
Ping @hvesalai, anything missing to get this merged? |
thank you! |
Uuugh, this highlights things in Scala 2 that shouldn't be. |
Let's revert / make it configurable when @Kazark decides how we do Scala 3 support |
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.
Based on the docs.
compatible, with Scala 2. Therefore, it seems reasonable at a syntax level to
begin with the assumption that they are sufficiently compatible that we can
just start migrating towards the grammar of Scala 3.
writing Scala 2 code, to be made aware of the Scala 3 keywords by way of
syntax highlighting. That way you have an opportunity to rename your
variables before ever upgrading to 3.
highlighting w.r.t. to the new syntax; i.e., this is a "do 20%, get 80%"
scenario.
Overall this seems to me like a fairly simple and safe step toward adopting
Scala 3 syntax.