[Laszlo-dev] For Review: Change 20071206-dda-9 Summary: Fixes for [not] nullable syntax, and return type syntax for function.

[P T Withington]

Approved.

I wonder if we really need to store nullable and notnullable, or if we  
can just make the gammar smarter so that you can't have both?

On 2007-12-06, at 17:58 EST, Donald Anderson wrote:

> Change 20071206-dda-9 by dda at freddie.local on 2007-12-06 17:36:12 EST
>    in /Users/dda/laszlo/src/svn/openlaszlo/trunk-b
>    for http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/trunk
>
> Summary: Fixes for [not] nullable syntax, and return type syntax for  
> function.
>
> New Features: none
>
> Bugs Fixed: LPP-5059
>
> Technical Reviewer: ptw
> QA Reviewer: hminsky
> Doc Reviewer: (pending)
>
> Documentation: none
>
> Release Notes: none - feature is not yet released or used.
>
> Details:
>    The grammar fix for nullable is straightforward.
>
>    For function return values, given that functions
>    can be declared with/or without an identifier (using function  
> expressions),
>    we cannot put the type information on an ASTIdentifier, since
>    there may not be one.  The logical place to put the return value
>    is on the FormalParameterList, which might now be thought of as
>    the function's signature (if it weren't rather disruptive,
>    I would have changed the name).  Any function whether created
>    as a declaration or expression, has a FormalParamterList, so it
>    is a convenient place in the grammar.  Making this change
>    actually cleaned up the grammar slightly, I think.
>
> Tests:
> 1)   Run test/typevar.lzx to check nullable syntax, should give no  
> errors.
>
> 2)   Run lzsc on:
>
> // tests for return types
>
> function f1() { }
> function f2() : void { }
> function f3():Integer? { }
> function f4():Integer! { }
> function f5(x):Integer! { }
> function f6(x:int):Integer! { }
> function f7(x:int,y):Integer! { }
> function f8(x,y:int):Integer! { }
> function f9(x:int,y:int):Integer! { }
> function f10(x:int?,y:int):Integer! { }
> function f11(x:int?,y:int!):Integer! { }
> var x = function (x:int?,y:int!):Integer! { }
>
>   Running lzsc is currently the only way to test this, that will  
> probably change soon.
>
> 3)   Compared binary LFC files from compiler to make sure no  
> regressions.
>
> 4)   Ran smokecheck.lzx to make sure no regressions.
>
>
> Files:
> M      test/typevar.lzx
> M      WEB-INF/lps/server/sc/src/org/openlaszlo/sc/Parser.jjt
>
> Changeset: http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/patches/20071206-dda-9.tar
>
>
>
> --
>
> Don Anderson
> Java/C/C++, Berkeley DB, systems consultant
>
> Voice:  617-547-7881
> Email:  dda at ddanderson.com
> WWW:    http://www.ddanderson.com
>