Fixes #109. Fix closure handling in various corner cases. #132
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
…r blocks on static methods. `Invocation` was incorrectly determining the value of `self` to use when calling a function. Before myst-lang#131, it was only checking if the Call had a receiver, and would use that value if it did. After myst-lang#131, if the Call did _not_ have a receiver, it would then check if the functor was a closure, and use the closed value of `self` if it was. Now, Invocations _always_ perform both checks, with closures taking higher precedence than Call receivers (though, both will be pushed to the stack if the conditions are met). Before this commit, I was very confused why static methods weren't working while non-static methods were. I assumed it was an issue with `scope` vs `instance_scope` on Types or something like that, but had no idea. Now, though, I'm even more confused how _any_ case was working previously, as the Call receiver was _always_ being pushed as the value of `self`. At least with this version of the code, the value of `self` that will be present is more explicit and well-specified. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
…self`. Const lookup was only operating on the current scope and current `self`, rather than looking at the full lexical scope as well. Const lookup now does full recursive lookup (like a Call) to properly resolve in most cases. This commit also makes some changes to the Spec library to work with the new semantics of capturing `self` with closures.
|
I'm not entirely sure, but this seems like it will be a breaking change (at least in combination with #131) for the next release. Not an issue, just a note. |
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.
Invocationwas incorrectly determining the value ofselfto use when calling a function. Before #131, it was only checking if the Call had a receiver, and would use that value if it did. After #131, if the Call did not have a receiver, it would then check if the functor was a closure, and use the closed value ofselfif it was.Now, Invocations always perform both checks, with closures taking higher precedence than Call receivers (though, both will be pushed to the stack if the conditions are met).
Before this PR, I was very confused why static methods weren't working while non-static methods were. I assumed it was an issue with
scopevsinstance_scopeon Types or something like that, but had no idea.Now, though, I'm even more confused how any case was working previously, as the Call receiver was always being pushed as the value of
self. At least with this version of the code, the value ofselfthat will be present is more explicit and well-specified. ¯_(ツ)_/¯This PR also required making some changes to the Spec library to deal with the changes in semantics of what
selfwill be within various Calls.