fix: global var dependencies #2077
Conversation
petar-dambovaliev
requested review from
jaekwon,
moul,
piux2,
deelawn,
thehowl and
mvertes
as code owners
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2077 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 60.83% 60.83% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 563 563
Lines 75169 75314 +145
==========================================
+ Hits 45730 45818 +88
- Misses 26072 26125 +53
- Partials 3367 3371 +4
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
petar-dambovaliev
requested review from
a team,
gfanton and
leohhhn
as code owners
github-actions
bot
added
🧾 package/realm
petar-dambovaliev
force-pushed
the
vardeps
branch
from
c7365aa
to
813b7e1
Compare
petar-dambovaliev
force-pushed
the
vardeps
branch
from
ea4d5d0
to
db713cc
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The tests are still not covering a bunch of the cases:
https://app.codecov.io/gh/gnolang/gno/pull/2077?src=pr&el=tree
DeferStmt, BlockStmt and other are not tested entirely. Please address the issues and add test cases which check against their conditions, as well as error conditions.
For a feature like this, there cannot be only 1 filetest.
zivkovicmilos
modified the milestones:
🏗4️⃣ test4.gno.land,
🏗4️⃣ test4.gno.land [POST LAUNCH]
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is the first part of my review. I want to make sure I understand the intentions before completing it.
Tell me if I have the main idea of what this is solving. Previously, names referenced by globally defined function literals were not being verified to have been defined. These changes use this unique case as an entrypoint to recursively analyze all of the function literal's statements to ensure that all names referenced are actually defined.
Otherwise, please see the couple of comments I've left.
| existsLocal := func(name Name, bn BlockNode) bool { | ||
| curr := bn | ||
| for { | ||
| currNames := bn.GetBlockNames() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this be bn.GetBlockNames() or curr.GetBlockNames()?
| if name != "" { | ||
| pkg := packageOf(last) | ||
|
|
||
| if _, _, ok := pkg.FileSet.GetDeclForSafe(name); !ok { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't this return "" if this method returns true, indicating that the name is defined?
Yes, that is correct. |
fixes this by adding missing logic in in
findUndefined2