Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
WIP: fix: multiline string literals - #2032
Closed
mnemnion wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
Conversation
Fix for Zig #21358, #21360, which change tokenizing of multiline string literals to not include newlines.
Member
I think you missed #2031. Note that the newline is not longer included when calling |
mnemnion
commented
Sep 15, 2024
ContributorAuthor
Yes, I was on a commit from yesterday (last week actually dd78968), it looks like you got the fix in right when I started looking into it. Since there's no need for this branch, I'll close it. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fix for Zig #21358, #21360, which change tokenizing of multiline string literals to not include newlines. See ziglang/zig#21371.
This just changes the tokenizer, ZLS no longer SIGKILLs immediately, the integer underflow is gone from the tests, but several tests don't pass (which is to be expected).
I wanted to get some eyes on the fix, since I'm unfamiliar with the codebase, before trying to modify the tests to pass. Changing tests to pass a newly introduced bug would be unfriendly, after all.
Also, the fix includes doc comments, I don't think that affects ZLS the same way, but I could be wrong and it seemed worth mentioning.