PR #8207 without snapshot changes #8236
Conversation
rtfeldman
force-pushed
the
new-changes-diff
branch
4 times, most recently
from
e1b66bd to
33a6d5d
Compare
rtfeldman
force-pushed
the
new-changes-diff
branch
4 times, most recently
from
2be7253 to
76b0de4
Compare
rtfeldman
force-pushed
the
new-changes-diff
branch
from
76b0de4 to
4bc4550
Compare
rtfeldman
force-pushed
the
new-changes-diff
branch
from
4bc4550 to
d385ecc
Compare
| }, | ||
| '0'...'9' => return try self.tokenizeNumber(self.gpa, start), | ||
| '/' => return chompOneOfTwo(&self.pos, src, '/', .OpSlash, .OpDoubleSlash), | ||
| '-' => return chompOneOfTwo(&self.pos, src, '>', .OpBinaryMinus, .OpThinArrow), // TODO handle unary minus here by checking for preceding whitespace |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was curious about your rework and came across this comment. Just my two cents: If a-b should be the same as a - b, then whitespace is not the right way to distinguish between binary and unary minus.
This is probably not that relevant in the grand scheme of this rework. Just a small thing I noticed.
|
Thank you for your contribution! Sometimes PRs end up staying open for a long time without activity, which can make the list of open PRs get long and time-consuming to review. To keep things manageable for reviewers, this bot automatically closes PRs that haven’t had activity in 60 days. This PR hasn’t had activity in 30 days, so it will be automatically closed if there is no more activity in the next 30 days. Keep in mind that PRs marked |
2 participants
With snapshot changes, the diff on #8207 is too gigantic to be reviewable. This branch is just to have a smaller diff to work with!