Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix #4464: backticked expressions in class body #4668

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Sep 20, 2017
Merged

Fix #4464: backticked expressions in class body #4668

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
becdf50
Fix #4464: backticked expressions in class body should be left in the…
GeoffreyBooth Aug 30, 2017
1d3af8c
Simplify fix for #4464
connec Sep 20, 2017
921eb3f
Clarify the purpose of Class::addInitializerExpression
connec Sep 20, 2017
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
7 changes: 3 additions & 4 deletions lib/coffeescript/nodes.js
View file
Open in desktop

Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.

7 changes: 3 additions & 4 deletions src/nodes.coffee
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -1751,11 +1751,10 @@ exports.Class = class Class extends Base
new Block expressions

# Add an expression to the class initializer
#
# NOTE Currently, only methods and static methods are valid in ES class initializers.
# When additional expressions become valid, this method should be updated to handle them.
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this comment no longer valid?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wavered on it a little. I felt it was confusing since the check now also allows PassthroughLiterals, and I didn't want to add that to the comment.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I guess I could go the other way and flesh it out a little to indicate that it's the key method for determining whether something appears in the class initializer or executable body?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah I think more is better. Maybe even explicitly mention class fields/class properties, that when they reach Stage 4 this is where we detect them. That way future PRs to add things like that look more like your version of this PR and less like mine 😄

addInitializerExpression: (node) ->
if @validInitializerMethod node
if node.unwrapAll() instanceof PassthroughLiteral
node
else if @validInitializerMethod node
@addInitializerMethod node
else
null
Expand Down
15 changes: 15 additions & 0 deletions test/classes.coffee
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -1833,3 +1833,18 @@ test "#4591: super.x.y, super['x'].y", ->
eq 2, b.t
eq 2, b.s
eq 2, b.r

test "#4464: backticked expressions in class body", ->
class A
`get x() { return 42; }`

class B
`get x() { return 42; }`
constructor: ->
@y = 84

a = new A
eq 42, a.x
b = new B
eq 42, b.x
eq 84, b.y