Singleton class syntax support #8
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #8 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 92.34% 93.21% +0.87%
==========================================
Files 2 2
Lines 222 221 -1
==========================================
+ Hits 205 206 +1
+ Misses 17 15 -2
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
KaanOzkan
commented
Nov 20, 2020
| %i[def defs command].include?(next_statement&.type) && !next_statement.docstring | ||
| end | ||
|
|
||
| private def process_method_definition(method_node, sig_node) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also did a quick refactoring of the naming here to better represent the variable.
next_statement => method_node
child => sig_node
|
Nice refactoring work. I gave it a scan, but I'm mostly trusting the tests. Thanks! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Having yard documentation combined with a sig inside the singleton class syntax, class << self, was giving the following warning:
[warn]: in YARD::Handlers::Ruby::DSLHandler: Undocumentable method, missing name
This PR aims to support singleton class syntax by handling the class definition of the singleton similar to before. In the previous implementation singleton class's contents were skipped as it's not of type list. Here in the #process method we explicitly call the existing handler logic if we encounter a singleton class.
Most of the diff is due to moving the handler logic into a separate function.
I tested more extensively locally but in terms of the PR I only unskipped the existing test. If wanted I can add more complex cases.