Allow skipping abstract method translation#965
Conversation
|
|
||
| assert_equal( | ||
| <<~RUBY, | ||
| # RBS_REWRITTEN_ANNOTATION: @abstract |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's not rewritten.
The other such comment is RBS_IGNORED_UNKNOWN_ANNOTATION, which isn't right here (this is known, but intentionally ignore).
Perhaps
| # RBS_REWRITTEN_ANNOTATION: @abstract | |
| # RBS_IGNORED_ANNOTATION: @abstract |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's the @abstract on the class/module though. The one on methods don't get any prefix at all.
Do you think we should still add one?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh I meant to comment this on the method-level annotation.
I didn't implement the RBS_REWRITTEN_ANNOTATION comment to method-level annotations, that's just an oversight on my part. Could be nice to add it (not in this PR, and not urgent).
Those comments only exist for debuggability, to help with investigating any potential issues with the output.
vinistock
force-pushed
the
vs_allow_skipping_abstract_method_translation
branch
from
2627f49 to
1098f24
Compare
|
|
||
| assert_equal( | ||
| <<~RUBY, | ||
| # RBS_REWRITTEN_ANNOTATION: @abstract |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh I meant to comment this on the method-level annotation.
I didn't implement the RBS_REWRITTEN_ANNOTATION comment to method-level annotations, that's just an oversight on my part. Could be nice to add it (not in this PR, and not urgent).
Those comments only exist for debuggability, to help with investigating any potential issues with the output.
vinistock
force-pushed
the
vs_allow_skipping_abstract_method_translation
branch
from
1098f24 to
97ad914
Compare
vinistock
force-pushed
the
vs_allow_skipping_abstract_method_translation
branch
from
97ad914 to
c10907d
Compare
2 participants
This PR introduces a new option that allows skipping the translation of abstract methods.