Improve "Unexpected input: '{'" error message #4122
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
Signed-off-by: Ben Sherman <[email protected]>
✅ Deploy Preview for nextflow-docs-staging canceled.
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Close #2082 #3325
Some syntax errors in processes and workflows, such as missing/extra commas, are not handled well by the Groovy parser, likely because the custom DSL syntax makes it difficult to determine exactly which token is the cause. As a result, Groovy simply reports the opening brace as the cause:
Unexpected input: '{', which causes many users to look for errors before this point, when in reality the error is almost always after it.Unfortunately, we can't use the DSL to improve this error because it happens during parsing, before our custom AST transforms. The most we can do is to intercept the error and try to provide a hint to the user. The long-term solution is to create a DSL that doesn't require as many syntax transformations.
Try any of the pipeline examples in the liked issues, you will see that the error message now includes an extra note about checking the process/workflow body.