generalStatement() #77

New Issue

deavmi · 2023-01-08T10:38:11Z

deavmi commented

2023-01-08 10:38:11 +00:00

Problem we have

Currently when implementing for-loop processing in dependency/core.d we need to effectievly do a generalPass() but on a single entity which isn't possible.

Solution: `generalStatementPass()`

I suggest, therefore, that we introduce a metho called generalStatementPass(Container, Context, Statement) which can do exactly this. Then we move the body code out of generalPass and into this, and make a call to generalStatementPass() from the for-each loop in generalPass().

## Problem we have Currently when implementing for-loop processing in `dependency/core.d` we need to effectievly do a `generalPass()` but on a single entity which isn't possible. ## Solution: `generalStatementPass()` I suggest, therefore, that we introduce a metho called `generalStatementPass(Container, Context, Statement)` which can do exactly this. Then we move the body code out of `generalPass` and into this, and make a call to `generalStatementPass()` from the for-each loop in `generalPass()`.

deavmi added reference loops

2023-01-08 10:39:48 +00:00

deavmi added this to the Dependency tree, type-checking and codegen project 2023-01-08 10:39:52 +00:00

deavmi self-assigned this 2023-01-08 10:39:55 +00:00

deavmi added this to the Basics milestone 2023-01-08 10:39:58 +00:00

deavmi added the

dependency

label 2023-01-08 10:40:01 +00:00

deavmi added the due date 2023-01-10

2023-01-08 10:40:12 +00:00

deavmi commented

2023-01-08 10:45:51 +00:00

Okay, just did this now and it seems to work

deavmi commented

2023-01-08 10:53:09 +00:00

NO! It isn't what I want!

deavmi commented

2023-01-08 11:03:09 +00:00

Solution found ✅

We pass various of the test cases which is good.

Okay, it is now what I want. What we have done is the following.

## Solution found ✅ We pass various of the test cases which is good. Okay, it is **now** what I want. What we have done is the following.

deavmi commented

2023-01-08 11:05:45 +00:00

Solution found ✅

We pass various of the test cases which is good.

Updates to `generalPass()`

We now have the following loop:

foreach(Statement entity; entities)
{
    gprintln("generalPass(): Processing entity: "~entity.toString());
    Entity ent = cast(Entity)entity;

    DNode statementDNode = generalStatement(c, context, entity);
    if(statementDNode is null)
    {
    	gprintln("Not adding dependency '"~to!(string)(statementDNode)~"' as it is null");
    }
    else
    {
    	node.needs(statementDNode);
    }
}

The added code is:

DNode statementDNode = generalStatement(c, context, entity);
if(statementDNode is null)
{
	gprintln("Not adding dependency '"~to!(string)(statementDNode)~"' as it is null");
}
else
{
	node.needs(statementDNode);
}

This will check if there is a dependency node returned, and only if so then add it to the COntainer's DNode, node. We do this as sometimes there are either unimplemented checks or simply a DNode is not meant to be returned, see VariableParameter and Functiond efinitions for example. This fits in with what we were doing previously but is now neater.

## Solution found ✅ We pass various of the test cases which is good. ### Updates to `generalPass()` We now have the following loop: ```d foreach(Statement entity; entities) { gprintln("generalPass(): Processing entity: "~entity.toString()); Entity ent = cast(Entity)entity; DNode statementDNode = generalStatement(c, context, entity); if(statementDNode is null) { gprintln("Not adding dependency '"~to!(string)(statementDNode)~"' as it is null"); } else { node.needs(statementDNode); } } ``` The added code is: ```d DNode statementDNode = generalStatement(c, context, entity); if(statementDNode is null) { gprintln("Not adding dependency '"~to!(string)(statementDNode)~"' as it is null"); } else { node.needs(statementDNode); } ``` This will check if there is a dependency node returned, and only if so then add it to the COntainer's DNode, `node`. We do this as sometimes there are either _unimplemented checks_ or simply a DNode is not meant to be returned, see `VariableParameter` and Functiond efinitions for example. This fits in with what we were doing previously but is now neater.

deavmi commented

2023-01-11 09:26:28 +00:00

This was completed as of commit ec7d8cf4240b24a2f6fdbd8071195c9efe08d573 on branch loops

This was completed as of commit `ec7d8cf4240b24a2f6fdbd8071195c9efe08d573` on branch `loops`

deavmi closed this issue

2023-01-11 09:26:39 +00:00

Sign in to join this conversation.