Backport {Uint,Int,Fixed,Ufixed}Keyword from DSL v2 to v0/v1
#662
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
|
This was referenced Nov 16, 2023
Xanewok
force-pushed
the
reintroduce-type-name-keyword-names
branch
from
c986ba8 to
a92a38c
Compare
OmarTawfik
reviewed
Nov 20, 2023
OmarTawfik
requested changes
Nov 20, 2023
Now that integer type scanner names all end with "Keyword", we can use the same uniform logic.
Xanewok
force-pushed
the
reintroduce-type-name-keyword-names
branch
from
a92a38c to
12348cf
Compare
Xanewok
changed the title
{Uint,Int,Fixed,Ufixed}Keyword from DSL v2 to v0/v1
OmarTawfik
approved these changes
Nov 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Part of #652
Helps with #650
These make more sense, given that these are the names used in the official grammar (fixed-bytes, signed-integer-type, unsigned-integer-type) and "XXXKeyword" name implies a single atom and not a more complex rule (e.g. looking at the
fixeddefinition...).I think we should revert the accidental name change in v2 and later decide if we want to change these.
EDIT: This now does the opposite and backports the name change to v0/v1.