Extending directive checking #1257
Merged
Conversation
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
This was referenced Dec 18, 2023
Merged
nevkontakte
approved these changes
Dec 19, 2023
nevkontakte
approved these changes
Dec 21, 2023
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This ticket extends how the directives are determined by allowing any AST node containing a comment able to be checked. This includes imports, functions, types, fields, and values.
This does not affect
//gopherjs:prune-originaland//gopherjs:keep-original, so currently we are still only checking for directives on functions. This change is in preparation for adding the//gopherjs:purgedirective.The only functional change should be that the directives are no longer prefix tested, meaning if there was a directive like
//gopherjs:keep-original-and-remove-overlaywe wouldn't accidentally match it to//gopherjs:keep-original. This is not currently a problem and will not affect the current code. This is just prevention of a potential problem as the directives are being worked on in future tickets.