-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
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
Add Support of Chained Method/Function Calls #55
Add Support of Chained Method/Function Calls #55
Conversation
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #55 +/- ##
========================================
+ Coverage 71.8% 72.4% +0.5%
========================================
Files 18 18
Lines 3772 3783 +11
========================================
+ Hits 2710 2739 +29
+ Misses 1062 1044 -18
|
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 looks really good, @engineerjoe440!
The test cases, the grammar update, and the transformer class are all 👍
One little nitpick, a minor fix, and we can merge this in.
blark/iec.lark
Outdated
@@ -722,6 +722,7 @@ _statement: ";" | |||
| reset_statement | |||
| reference_assignment_statement | |||
| return_statement | |||
| function_call_statement_list |
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.
I'll be a bit nitpicky here with naming - how about chained_function_call_statement
?
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.
I had very strongly considered that! 😆 I thought that maybe I'd stick with "list" just because that felt more in-line with other things, but I'm for it! I'll make that change...
Co-authored-by: Ken Lauer <[email protected]>
Thanks! |
Issues Addressed
Changes
function_call_statement_list
grammar.Closing Thoughts
I think this is a fairly reasonable way to address this item, but I'm very open to comments or suggestions. I think it's possible to combine the original
function_call_statement
and this newfunction_call_statement_list
but I left the original one for consistency sake. Let me know what you think!