Skip to content

Fix parser exception in using statements with empty aliases #16745

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

Merged

Conversation

MartinGC94
Copy link
Contributor

@MartinGC94 MartinGC94 commented Jan 13, 2022

PR Summary

Fixes #16676

The parser threw an exception when entering a new line after the equals token, and when you entered a comma after the equals sign like in these 2 examples:

using namespace whatever =

using namespace whatever = ,

PR Checklist

@ghost ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Jan 21, 2022
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jan 21, 2022

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

@iSazonov iSazonov requested a review from vexx32 January 21, 2022 06:00
@iSazonov
Copy link
Collaborator

@andschwa Have you any concerns about PSES?

@ghost ghost removed the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Jan 21, 2022
Copy link
Collaborator

@SeeminglyScience SeeminglyScience left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM! No PSES concerns I can think of.

@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw added the CL-Engine Indicates that a PR should be marked as an engine change in the Change Log label Jan 24, 2022
@andyleejordan
Copy link
Member

I agree with @SeeminglyScience, I don't see an impact on PSES.

Turns out that commas also caused the parser to throw
@MartinGC94 MartinGC94 requested a review from iSazonov January 29, 2022 00:39
@MartinGC94
Copy link
Contributor Author

I also discovered that commas have the same problem: using command X = , causes an error.

@iSazonov
Copy link
Collaborator

iSazonov commented Feb 2, 2022

@MartinGC94 Please look test error.

@iSazonov
Copy link
Collaborator

iSazonov commented Feb 4, 2022

@MartinGC94 I reviewed all code paths with GetCommandArgument() and found the same issue if we type configuration ,.
It is in private ExpressionAst GetWordOrExpression(Token keywordToken). There is GetCommandArgument() call with only TokenKind.EndOfInput check.

It would be great if you fixed this too.

@iSazonov iSazonov self-requested a review February 4, 2022 09:50
@MartinGC94
Copy link
Contributor Author

I will take a look later, but typing configuration , into the console doesn't cause an exception on my system so that scenario may already be handled elsewhere.

@iSazonov
Copy link
Collaborator

iSazonov commented Feb 4, 2022

Assert throw in debug build
image

@ghost ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Feb 11, 2022
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Feb 11, 2022

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

@pull-request-quantifier-deprecated

This PR has 31 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!


Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +28 -3
Percentile : 12.4%

Total files changed: 2

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +13 -3
.ps1 : +15 -0

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detetcted.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.


Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

@adityapatwardhan adityapatwardhan merged commit 84241c3 into PowerShell:master Jul 19, 2022
@ghost ghost removed the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Jul 19, 2022
@adityapatwardhan
Copy link
Member

@MartinGC94 Thank you for your contribution!

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Aug 12, 2022

🎉v7.3.0-preview.7 has been released which incorporates this pull request.:tada:

Handy links:

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CL-Engine Indicates that a PR should be marked as an engine change in the Change Log Extra Small
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Parser throws with using statement aliases on new lines
7 participants