Closed
Conversation
Member
|
checksums seem to be wrong. try regenerating those? |
Member
Author
|
Some of the test failures were testing that we gave wrong line numbers and now we give better numbers. Some of the test failures look owrth looking into, though. For example, @test Meta.lower(Main, :(a.[1])) == Expr(:error, "invalid syntax \"a.[1]\"") |
Keno
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 11, 2024
The last time we tried to bump JuliaSyntax (#53119), it didn't work out due to test failues. As a result, we haven't actually bumped JuliaSyntax in about a year and there are several syntax changes in JuliaSyntax that we haven't picked up yet (i.e. are waiting in PRs). I don't know what the current situation is, but I think we need to get back to a point where we can bump JuliaSyntax regualarly, so let's try to take the first step.
Keno
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 11, 2024
The last time we tried to bump JuliaSyntax (#53119), it didn't work out due to test failues. As a result, we haven't actually bumped JuliaSyntax in about a year and there are several syntax changes in JuliaSyntax that we haven't picked up yet (i.e. are waiting in PRs). I don't know what the current situation is, but I think we need to get back to a point where we can bump JuliaSyntax regualarly, so let's try to take the first step.
Keno
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 9, 2024
The last time we tried to bump JuliaSyntax (#53119), it didn't work out due to test failues. As a result, we haven't actually bumped JuliaSyntax in about a year and there are several syntax changes in JuliaSyntax that we haven't picked up yet (i.e. are waiting in PRs). I don't know what the current situation is, but I think we need to get back to a point where we can bump JuliaSyntax regualarly, so let's try to take the first step.
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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.
Using Mod as ModName(#52784) depends on the corresponding PR to JuliaSyntax(JuliaLang/JuliaSyntax.jl#406) which I made against the commit to JuliaSytnax main.
This PR separates bumping JuliaSyntax from 0.4.7 to 0.4.8 so that #52784 is easier to review.
c.f. #52136, which bumped to 0.4.7