-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 429
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
Fix extensions printing #2674
Fix extensions printing #2674
Conversation
…extensions * 'fix-extensions' of github.com:/davesnx/reason: Prepare for 3.8.2 (reasonml#2673)
3debf7d
to
b4a3d03
Compare
f05b649
to
cf9ce95
Compare
@@ -237,7 +237,10 @@ class boxB ('a) (init: 'a) = | |||
|
|||
/* To be able to put an attribute on just the return in that case, use | |||
* parens. */ | |||
[@onBoxC x; y] | |||
[@onBoxC |
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.
this one is a little awkward
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.
At first, I found it weird but later made sense. Any structure_item inside an attribute should be treated like a structure_item without an attribute...
I can roll it back thought.
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.
that does make sense. happy to keep it as is
[@someattr] | ||
let foo: int => int; | ||
}; | ||
module Foo: {[@someattr] |
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.
this needs to be fixed
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.
Fixed in e17fe1b
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.
very nice, thanks
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.
looks good, there's just the module case to fix
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. I think we're ready to land this
When printing code with refmt: Extensions are printed with and without brackets
[]
in some cases, creating a few problems:This PR tries to unify them to always add
[]
while respecting the inline let attributes added #1703.