Skip to content
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

Refactor single-unit checking out of check.cpp #4649

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Dec 10, 2024

Conversation

jonmeow
Copy link
Contributor

@jonmeow jonmeow commented Dec 6, 2024

This is primarily moving code around, to try to create a logical split of the code in check.cpp, makingthe API boundaries clearer.

There's one small, deliberate logic change around false returns from HandleParseNode, where before there was a CARBON_CHECK instantiated by the #define (per NodeKind), and now it's outside the #define (done mainly because the message didn't keep up with the Handle##Name -> HandleParseNode rename).

@jonmeow jonmeow force-pushed the check-unit-refactor branch from 62546a0 to 2511f24 Compare December 10, 2024 20:49
@zygoloid zygoloid added this pull request to the merge queue Dec 10, 2024
Merged via the queue into carbon-language:trunk with commit 87b3671 Dec 10, 2024
8 checks passed
@jonmeow jonmeow deleted the check-unit-refactor branch December 12, 2024 22:30
bricknerb pushed a commit to bricknerb/carbon-lang that referenced this pull request Dec 16, 2024
This is primarily moving code around, to try to create a logical split
of the code in check.cpp, makingthe API boundaries clearer.

There's one small, deliberate logic change around false returns from
`HandleParseNode`, where before there was a `CARBON_CHECK` instantiated
by the `#define` (per `NodeKind`), and now it's outside the `#define`
(done mainly because the message didn't keep up with the `Handle##Name`
-> `HandleParseNode` rename).
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants