I'm going to commit my changes;
I ignored 3 unit tests that I will get back to. I am not decided on
how String literals are handled when a member field resolves to a
String type. I have normal string concatenation not being parened IE
"foo" + "bar" + "baz". I know how to fix it, just going
Heh,
I wouldn't say awesome but I'm beginning to like this visitor
framework more every day because this fix wasn't intrusive at all.
This proves we have it working right; Here is a test that is just plain weird
a = (a + b) - c + d * e;
It now produces;
a = (((a + b) - c) + (d * e))
Notic
> You're not think 5th dimensionally here;
I rarely venture in such an integer state of mind. I'm more of a
fractal kinda guy :-)
> Currently without fixing this bug a use has the expression statement of;
>
> var a = ((a + b) - (c + d)) * e;
>
> They use the compiler, it checks out fine, FalconJx
Quoting Erik de Bruin :
Agreed (on the 'simple' fix).
A thought: isn't doing this in Jx not somewhat over the top? I mean,
if you are going to 'calculate' the parenthesis somehow, you might be
fixing the user's code - after all, the user can put them in however
he likes... Isn't there a way fo
Erik,
You're not think 5th dimensionally here;
Currently without fixing this bug a use has the expression statement of;
var a = ((a + b) - (c + d)) * e;
They use the compiler, it checks out fine, FalconJx is currently
rendering to JavaScript that will get executed;
var a = a + b - c + d *
Agreed (on the 'simple' fix).
A thought: isn't doing this in Jx not somewhat over the top? I mean,
if you are going to 'calculate' the parenthesis somehow, you might be
fixing the user's code - after all, the user can put them in however
he likes... Isn't there a way for the parenthesis to be (and
Don't worry about this one.
When I fix this, I'm just going to have to get every test working
again before I commit. I have time since this is a breaking bug that
will render complex binary expressions useless as it stands.
What I plan on doing is the most simple fix. Since I know that the
Mike,
Sure, no problem. I'm not planning any work on Jx the next couple of
days, so if you figure something in that time, go ahead and implement.
Also, if you need help fixing tests, I don't mind, so feel free to
ask.
EdB
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Michael Schmalle
wrote:
>
> Erik,
>
> N
