Le 28/10/2014 12:45, Mark Rizun a écrit :
Yes, because they are wrong. Here is an issue:
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/14254/AST-method-replaceWith-does-not-change-source-interval
I would say that they are correct.
When I write source to source compilers, I admit that anything that I
change in the AST (via replaceWith equivalent) has no valid source
interval (since it does not exist in the original source). However, all
unmodified nodes should keep their 'non-modified' source interval (since
I may need it to fetch the relevant text from the source).
If I want my modification to the AST to have valid source intervals,
then, I need to regenerate the source from the modified AST. And only
then they are valid.
You may want to update the source interval when you do a replaceWith,
but the only thing we will get with what you want to do is that, after a
replaceWith, no source interval can be trusted since it may end up past
the end of the original source string length.
Thierry
2014-10-28 13:32 GMT+02:00 Thierry Goubier <thierry.goub...@gmail.com
<mailto:thierry.goub...@gmail.com>>:
Le 28/10/2014 12:12, Mark Rizun a écrit :
Well, not really.
Technically, tokens are used to drive a parser from a scanner.
If an AST node knows how to relate itself to its original
source
code chunk and is able to print itself correctly, then
tokens are
redundant.
In short, if you work with parsers, you'd better know what
tokens
are. If you're only working with the AST, tokens are
redundant and
noise (i.e. they often have a type (or more than one) which
is only
understood by the parser).
I'm working with ASTs sourceInterval. Trying to calculate it after
method replaceWith:.
You see, my proble was that each node of AST doesn't hold its
start and
stop position in same place. So I thought that token is such a
place,
however, eventually I understood that RBValueNodes don't have
tokens:)
Do you mean you're trying to do a replace and update the positions
of all the nodes ?
Thierry
