Shebang callback support in language bindings

Abierto
  • ¿Algo no está bien?
#4,344 0 comentarios 0 reacciones 0 asignados Ver en GitHub

Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día

Nadie ha tomado este issue todavía.

Evaluación

Dificultad
5/5
Tiempo estimado
Más de una semana
Aptitud para principiantes
30/100
Tipo de issue
Nueva funcionalidad
Claridad
Necesita aclaración
Estado de actividad
Activo
Stack tecnológico
c, ruby, rust
Área
backend-api-design

Línea de trabajo

Start with the Rust binding callback branch and the referenced main_script option in ext/prism/extension.c, then compare how Prism’s language bindings handle parser options. The issue asks whether shebang processing belongs in Prism or in each binding, including the effects of flags such as -n on the AST. Done means that design question is resolved and the chosen behavior is supported consistently.

Escrito por el modelo de indexación a partir del texto del issue.

Descripción

related to https://github.com/fables-tales/rubyfmt/issues/916

Some files are only syntactically valid after they've been processed with shebang comments, e.g.

#!/usr/bin/env ruby -np
next

Currently, the way these are handled is by passing a shebang_callback which reads the flags and sets the appropriate options (like here in CRuby).

I'd like for rubyfmt to be able to support files like this, and as for the immediate solution it wouldn't be too hard to add support for shebang callbacks in the Rust bindings (I've got a branch with those changes), but I suppose my broader question is whether or not language bindings all having to reinvent shebang handling is the desired end result.

Right now, this example also fails in the prism gem (Prism::parse('#!/usr/bin/env ruby -np\nnext') returns errors), and presumably does the same for all the language bindings, and yet echo '#!/usr/bin/ruby -n\nnext' | ruby -c says the syntax is OK, which is somewhat surprising and leads to things like ruby-lsp also reporting errors on similar files. That said, a reasonable argument for Prism not doing this handling by default is that some shebang flags (like -n) result in nodes being inserted into the AST, and it might not be ideal to do that without some kind of explicit choice -- though as it currently stands it does require the main_script option to be set, which may be sufficient.

So my question is, is the preferred approach for users of Prism to re-implement shebang handling (and it can be exposed as an option by the various language bindings), or is there some world where Prism itself handles shebangs?

Lenguaje dominante
C
Estrellas
1k
Forks
202
Merge medio
6 h 18 min
PR fusionados (30 d)
77

Preparar el entorno

Primeros pasos

  1. Lee el issue completo y luego la guía de contribución del proyecto.
  2. Comenta en el issue que vas a ocuparte — evita que dos personas hagan lo mismo.
  3. Haz un fork del repositorio y trabaja en una rama.
  4. Abre un pull request que haga referencia al número del issue.

Más de ruby/prism

Todos los issues de ruby/prism

Issues similares

Más issues de C

Recibe los nuevos issues en tu correo

Un resumen breve de issues de GitHub para principiantes.