The purpose of the newline is to make it clearer where a given
diagnostic begins and ends, particularly as the first message of a
diagnostic may not be the error.
This is a trivial code change, but ripples edits through test files.
This doesn't add full support. I'm separating it out to make the effects
of the modifier changes clearer for review. I'm restructuring a little
with the expectation that we'll have some more categories of modifier
keywords in the future (similar to `extern`, these may not be in a "set"
such as access), and thus easily scaling up to a few more would be
useful.
Note #3486 rewrites the macro behavior, and is already approved: so this
PR is only for the changed enforcement during error. Also, #3493 already
changed several things to allow any token while this PR was awaiting
review, but this still changes enforcement for `For` and `If`.
This was brought up on
[#toolchain](https://discord.com/channels/655572317891461132/655578254970716160/1182066616456970251),
and I think this any-on-error approach gets at least some support. We
could try setting it to the introducer, but it's quite possible we want
it to be something like the token which led to the parse error, rather
than a static token. That leads to a conclusion that, most typically,
we'll expect arbitrary tokens when error conditions may lead to tokens
which aren't the expected token.
A couple related, recent `CARBON_IF_ERROR` crash fixes can be found in
#3404 and #3424. Something like #3404 would've been needed regardless
because `namespace` didn't have `CARBON_IF_ERROR` before, although I
might've missed the underlying issue with declarations because only
`namespace` had a relevant test (that is, if #3404 had added
`CARBON_ANY_TOKEN_ON_ERROR`, I wouldn't have had a crash in #3462).
#3424 would've been avoided with this change because there was a
`CARBON_IF_ERROR`, and it was just too restrictive.
This leaves a single state for each in the expr loop. I was trying to
think through ways to have per-token states, but they felt sort of
bulky.
Note this is more verbose: but I think the long-term is going to be that
when we start wanting to add handlers, we're going to need to switch to
different names based on the token found. As a consequence, the parse
state logic will end up diverging a little, and we'll just want to align
towards boilerplate handlers.
Short-term, this opens up a path for saying that each parse node
corresponds to precisely one token in success states, and separates out
what were becoming big handler functions in check.
This is supporting a direction that all parse nodes should correspond to
a single token, allowing for reduced tokenized buffer access during
checking (it's still necessary for diagnostics, and some literals).
One of the justifications for a unified parse node was implementation
LOC: note this is slightly smaller, using macros to reduce some
duplication. While this does add more switching in HandleDeclScopeLoop,
that's offset by less explicit switching in the check handlers. Also, I
think the duplication in HandleDeclScopeLoop can be reduced by shifting
the flow there, which I'll do in a separate PR.
I was suggesting this because `FloatingPoint` is pretty long. `int` and
`float` should be familiar abbreviations. `unsigned` should be familiar
to developers too, but `UnsignedInt` still feels usefully clearer for
the additional chars.
This is an incremental improvement on our diagnostic messages that
simply underlines an entire token if the token is larger than 1 char
(else it points to the single char with a caret like it used to).
For now, we require the same introducer to be used each time a class is
declared, but see #3384.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
This removes a (very) hot branch in the lexer where we need to special
case when a token is the first token and can't look at its previous
token. It also seems like a generally nice change to the structure of
both the token buffer and parse tree as there are now bracketing
elements for both ends and we should be able to avoid similar branching
in the future.
Mostly mechanical updates to the lexer and parser code to handle this,
but also needed to special case the location information in the
autoupdate code. And then the usual large body of auto-updated tests.
No benchmark data for this change alone as in isolation and in the
current lexer structure it doesn't make a big difference. But this
branch was particularly difficult to handle when trying to update the
whitespace skipping code to be faster, and so I think it is worth
systematically avoiding the special case here.
Continuing with #3070. Just a dir and file rename (mostly removing
prefixes, although for parse_tree_fuzzer and parse_tree_file_test I'm
dropping "tree" instead of "parse"). Everything in the parse dir should
be marked as a move.
Jon Ross-Perkins
josh11b
Geoff RomerandRichard Smith
Jacob Schneider
Chandler Carruth