Skip to content

Rewrite Variable Logic From Scratch #137

Open

Description

@omniomi

There are multiple issues with variables as they stand now in the grammar some of which have been reported and some of which haven't:

There are also questions about the correct scope of properties and methods (mentioned #131) and questions about to what extent the grammar should be concerned with user expectation/"most themes" vs either correctness (subjective) or consistency (with which languages?) (#130 and #129).

Background

The following cases need to be covered with as little repetition / complexity as possible:

  • Regular variables with and without scopes, properties, array position, methods, etc.
  • Variables contained within strings.
  • Variables contained within sub-expressions with and without scopes, properties, array position, methods, etc.
  • Variables in and out of strings and sub-expressions when using the ${Variable} format again with and without scopes, properties, array position, methods, etc.

The following gotchas need to be taken in to account:

  • Which special characters are legal within ${Variable} syntax vs $Variable syntax.
  • International characters (\p{L} vs [A-z]`).
  • Access of variables through splatting where the sigil is @.
  • Separate scoping for constants, automatic variables, language variables, etc.
  • $$ where "$$Hello" needs to show $$ as the variable and Hello as part of the double quoted string and other similar oddities.
  • Lots of others...

Planned Format/Rules

??? tbd

Re: Scope selection -> See #138

Activity

  1. changed the title [-][Project] Rewrite Variable Logic From Scratch[/-] [+]Rewrite Variable Logic From Scratch[/+] on Aug 16, 2018
  2. msftrncs commented on Aug 16, 2018

    @msftrncs
    Contributor

    Is there a means in the grammar system to be able to specify an optional repository object as needing to immediately follow another object? (similar to "include" but working after the "end" match? I think such a means would simplify trying to catch everywhere that a property/method can be used. Obviously the match (or begin) regex would need to start with '\G' (or it would have to be assumed).

  3. omniomi commented on Aug 16, 2018

    @omniomi
    ContributorAuthor

    Carl Morris (@msftrncs) sadly no. tmLanguage is incredibly limiting. You effectively have to use non-capturing lookheads and lookbehinds or wrangle nested includes. There's a slightly more powerful format based on the tmLanguage system called .sublime-syntax that has better context control but VS Code doesn't support it.

  4. msftrncs commented on Aug 22, 2018

    @msftrncs
    Contributor

    I mentioned elsewhere that I had improved matching for ${} variables. I think this regex segment would work for the inner part of the variable name: (note it forces the previous section possessive)

    +([^`{}]|`[`{}]?)+

    instead of:

    ([^}]*[^}`])

    or combine a couple patterns in to one for: (not including optional property)

    (?i:(\$)(\{)(?:(global|local|private|script|using|workflow):|((?:\p{L}|\d|_)+:)|:)?+([^`{}]|`[`{}]?)+(\}))

    PowerShell appears to accept any and all backticks, translating those that are valid to their corresponding character including linefeed and tabs, in addition to the allowing the { and }, throwing the unmatched ones away. I think it would even be possible to scope the escapes. The only quirky case I am not sure about is that ${`} is an empty name and not accepted. Also, for some reason the original matching was accepting ${env:} which is not valid, so I added the possessive qualifier to the drive portion, which also fixes $env:, then also adding |: so that a blank drive is allowed, but a $: or ${:} is not,

    None of this handles the :: static member

    This was all tested with VS Code against the 'TheBigTestFile'.

  5. stoinov commented on Aug 30, 2018

    @stoinov

    Just to note that at the moment splatting is incorrectly highlighted when inside quotes:
    "Some text with @splatting"
    This should be just a normal quoted text instead of variable looking one.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions