`tapioca gem`: a method with an anonymous block + RBS-comment: compiled to invalid syntax

Open
#2,663 2 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Assessment

Difficulty
3/5
Estimated time
1-2 days
Newbie friendliness
68/100
Issue type
Bug
Clarity
Clearly specified
Activity status
Quiet
Tech stack
ruby
Domain
tooling

Research direction

Start with the reproduction in spec/tapioca/gem/pipeline_spec.rb, especially the test for compiling an RBS signature on a method with an anonymous block. Trace how the signature is compiled and how the RBI method parameters are generated. Done means the compile test reports no unhandled errors and generated RBI contains valid syntax with a proc block parameter, such as &block.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Description

If we add a test compiling the following code (to spec/tapioca/gem/pipeline_spec.rb):

class Foo
  #: { -> void } -> void
  def foo(&); end
end

the test will fail with

Tapioca::Gem::PipelineSpec::Tapioca::Gem::Pipeline
  it compiles RBS signature for a method with ananymous block     FAIL (0.36s)
        Tapioca::Gem::Pipeline#compile should not have any unhandled errors reported.
        Please either fix your changes to ensure no errors are reported, or explicity pass
        in a custom `error_handler: ->(err) { ... }` to the `compile()` method to handle
        expected errors.
        .
        Expected ["Unable to compile signature for method: Foo#foo\n  Exception raised when loading signature: #<RuntimeError: The declaration for `foo` is missing parameter(s): &>\n"] to be empty.
        spec/tapioca/gem/pipeline_spec.rb:61:in 'Tapioca::Gem::PipelineSpec#compile'
        spec/tapioca/gem/pipeline_spec.rb:4907:in 'block (2 levels) in <class:PipelineSpec>'


Finished in 0.39466s
1 tests, 2 assertions, 1 failures, 0 errors, 0 skips

Buf if we try to generate an RBI-file for a gem with such method, we get a definition with invalid syntax, like

    sig { params(_arg0: ).returns(T.untyped) }
    def foo(&_arg0); end

Expected result signatures:

sig { params("&": T.proc.void).void }
def foo(&); end

or

sig { params(block: T.proc.void).void }
def foo(&block); end
Dominant language
Ruby
Stars
873
Forks
164
Avg merge
4d 27m
Merged PRs (30d)
9

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

More from Shopify/tapioca

All issues in Shopify/tapioca

Similar issues

More Ruby issues

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.