Closed
Conversation
Contributor
|
For maintainers only:
|
vankop
commented
Mar 9, 2022
6ea8dfa to
967da80
Compare
01cf4ba to
d9bd4ba
Compare
vankop
commented
Mar 17, 2022
|
Hey guys, any updates? :) |
Member
alexander-akait
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code looks good, because will be great to add more tests cases, I’m very afraid of regression, quite a serious change
Member
Author
|
@alexander-akait fixed |
alexander-akait
approved these changes
Apr 12, 2024
Member
|
@vankop Looks like we don't have |
Member
Author
|
optional chaining is not supported here.. in general we dont support optional chaining in import specifiers now as I remember, we just opt out optimizations. e.g. |
Member
Author
|
I guess same for computed part of members expression like |
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
feature
closes #14814
Did you add tests for your changes?
yes
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
no
What needs to be documented once your changes are merged?
nothing
** notes regarding design **
add in
parser.scopeparser.scope.guards/parser.scope.inGuardPositiontermins:
guard- chain of ids that is safe to use ( is truthy ) in currentparser.scopein guard position- any possibleguard( chain of ids ) could be added toparser.scope.guards, this means that thisguardwill be safe to use in current and all children parser scopes. e.g.&&logical expression:also 2 binary expressions could be guard position:
x in y/x != y ( when x falsy )lets assume that
yis import specifier then:also this could work with several guards positions, e.g. complex example: