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.

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

Improve handling of qualified names when renaming #531

Open
wants to merge 64 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

toinehartman
Copy link
Contributor

@toinehartman toinehartman commented Nov 26, 2024

  • Support renaming fully qualified modules names (instead of last name segment only)
  • Reject renaming of modules from qualified declaration names.
  • Explicitly do not support external imports
  • Support module renames from explorer view.
  • Escape name segments (\syntax) and v.v.
  • Resolve module names via dependencies
  • Use 'did rename' instead of 'will rename' callback, to prevent problems in case the evaluator is locked
  • Add UI test for module move
  • Change qualified names on folder rename

@toinehartman toinehartman self-assigned this Nov 26, 2024
@toinehartman toinehartman force-pushed the fix/rename-refactoring/module-names branch from 2e00c0b to 046df83 Compare November 26, 2024 16:25
@toinehartman toinehartman force-pushed the fix/rename-refactoring/module-names branch 2 times, most recently from 63a2866 to 9f8d64b Compare December 2, 2024 11:50
@toinehartman toinehartman force-pushed the fix/rename-refactoring/module-names branch 2 times, most recently from 83be677 to 9dc8e7d Compare December 5, 2024 10:50
Copy link
Member

@DavyLandman DavyLandman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good, with some exceptions that I marked down.

@toinehartman toinehartman force-pushed the fix/rename-refactoring/module-names branch from 05284c1 to dd91729 Compare December 9, 2024 13:08
@toinehartman toinehartman marked this pull request as ready for review December 10, 2024 14:00
Copy link
Member

@DavyLandman DavyLandman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Some small changes, looks mostly fine 👍🏼

Copy link
Member

@DavyLandman DavyLandman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good, 2 points that we should still pay attention to:

  1. the work inside the eval closure should really only call the evaluator, nothing more (just to avoid deadlocks), I've left a comment where it's happening.
  2. the test currently fails.

@toinehartman toinehartman force-pushed the fix/rename-refactoring/module-names branch 2 times, most recently from 308fcd9 to 5491327 Compare December 16, 2024 15:42
@toinehartman toinehartman force-pushed the fix/rename-refactoring/module-names branch from 033259a to 0373f5f Compare December 17, 2024 17:47
@toinehartman toinehartman force-pushed the fix/rename-refactoring/module-names branch from 0373f5f to e93a8dd Compare December 18, 2024 12:46
Copy link
Member

@DavyLandman DavyLandman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Some minor comments, but looks good. Also thinks @sungshik for the help with the UI tests.

@toinehartman toinehartman force-pushed the fix/rename-refactoring/module-names branch 2 times, most recently from a3e18f6 to a262066 Compare December 23, 2024 14:15
@DavyLandman
Copy link
Member

@toinehartman looks like it's ready to merge, want to do the honors?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants