-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 398
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.
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 stack overflow for large projects #1484
Open
Skipants
wants to merge
1
commit into
lsegal:main
Choose a base branch
from
Skipants:fix-stack-overflow
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+33
−42
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Forgive my sin here. I wrote it this way because of tests that fail when we only try and use
parser.file
like inlib/yard/handlers/base.rb
.An example test that fails is
yard/spec/handlers/c/class_handler_spec.rb
Line 70 in e91d41c
Here's what happens/reasoning behind this weird hack:
parser.file
is(stdin)
.(stdin)
onto theglobals.ordered_parser.files_to_retry
it's not able to be parsed by OrderedParser#parse. It should instead be aStringIO
with the C code contents.statement.source
are missing the wrappervoid Init_Foo() { ... }
and needs to be manually added.An alternative to this was to save the contents in globals but that felt hacky as well for a couple reasons:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This PR is definitely not mergeable with a hack like this, especially one that artificially causes a failing test to pass targeted specifically for that test.
Notably, (stdin) parsing is entirely common and not specific to C. What you're suggesting here is this PR does not support this use case. That would be a problem and highlights a possible breaking change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Excellent feedback, thank you. I'll let this one simmer a bit and see if I can come up with a less-hacky patch.