update some previous work on top level with the clean up
This commit is contained in:
parent
1bec6cf2db
commit
43236db9bd
|
@ -180,6 +180,7 @@ impl<'a> TopLevelComposer<'a> {
|
||||||
ancestors: vec![DefinitionId(index)],
|
ancestors: vec![DefinitionId(index)],
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
pub fn make_top_level_function_def(name: String, ty: Type) -> TopLevelDef {
|
pub fn make_top_level_function_def(name: String, ty: Type) -> TopLevelDef {
|
||||||
TopLevelDef::Function {
|
TopLevelDef::Function {
|
||||||
name,
|
name,
|
||||||
|
@ -189,8 +190,8 @@ impl<'a> TopLevelComposer<'a> {
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
// like to make and return a "primitive" symbol resolver? so that the symbol resolver can later
|
// like to make and return a "primitive" symbol resolver? so that the symbol resolver
|
||||||
// figure out primitive type definitions when passed a primitive type name
|
// can later figure out primitive type definitions when passed a primitive type name
|
||||||
pub fn get_primitives_definition(&self) -> Vec<(String, DefinitionId, Type)> {
|
pub fn get_primitives_definition(&self) -> Vec<(String, DefinitionId, Type)> {
|
||||||
vec![
|
vec![
|
||||||
("int32".into(), DefinitionId(0), self.primitives.int32),
|
("int32".into(), DefinitionId(0), self.primitives.int32),
|
||||||
|
@ -220,8 +221,11 @@ impl<'a> TopLevelComposer<'a> {
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
let mut ret_vector: Vec<(String, DefinitionId, Type)> = vec![(class_name.clone(), DefinitionId(class_def_id), ty)];
|
let mut ret_vector: Vec<(String, DefinitionId, Type)> = vec![(class_name.clone(), DefinitionId(class_def_id), ty)];
|
||||||
// parse class def body and register class methods into the def list
|
// parse class def body and register class methods into the def list
|
||||||
// NOTE: module's symbol resolver would not know the name of the class methods, thus cannot return their definition_id? so we have to manage it ourselves?
|
// NOTE: module's symbol resolver would not know the name of the class methods,
|
||||||
// or do we return the class method list of (method_name, def_id, type) to application to be used to build symbol resolver? <- current implementation
|
// thus cannot return their definition_id? so we have to manage it ourselves?
|
||||||
|
// or do we return the class method list of (method_name, def_id, type) to
|
||||||
|
// application to be used to build symbol resolver? <- current implementation
|
||||||
|
// FIXME: better do not return and let symbol resolver to manage the mangled name
|
||||||
for b in body {
|
for b in body {
|
||||||
if let ast::StmtKind::FunctionDef {name, ..} = &b.node {
|
if let ast::StmtKind::FunctionDef {name, ..} = &b.node {
|
||||||
let fun_name = name_mangling(class_name.clone(), name);
|
let fun_name = name_mangling(class_name.clone(), name);
|
||||||
|
@ -243,18 +247,20 @@ impl<'a> TopLevelComposer<'a> {
|
||||||
);
|
);
|
||||||
ret_vector.push((fun_name, DefinitionId(def_id), ty));
|
ret_vector.push((fun_name, DefinitionId(def_id), ty));
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
if name == "__init__" { // if it is the contructor, special handling is needed. In the above handling, we still add __init__ function to the class method
|
// if it is the contructor, special handling is needed. In the above
|
||||||
|
// handling, we still add __init__ function to the class method
|
||||||
|
if name == "__init__" {
|
||||||
self.definition_list.push(
|
self.definition_list.push(
|
||||||
TopLevelDefInfo {
|
TopLevelDefInfo {
|
||||||
def: TopLevelDef::Initializer {
|
def: TopLevelDef::Initializer {
|
||||||
class_id: DefinitionId(class_def_id) // FIXME: None if have no parameter, Some if same as __init__?
|
class_id: DefinitionId(class_def_id)
|
||||||
},
|
},
|
||||||
ty: self.primitives.none, // arbitary picked one
|
ty: self.primitives.none, // arbitary picked one
|
||||||
ast: None, // it is inside the class def body statments
|
ast: None, // it is inside the class def body statments
|
||||||
resolver: Some(resolver)
|
resolver: Some(resolver)
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
)
|
)
|
||||||
// FIXME: should we return this to the symbol resolver?
|
// FIXME: should we return this to the symbol resolver?, should be yes
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
} else { } // else do nothing
|
} else { } // else do nothing
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
|
@ -415,7 +421,8 @@ impl<'a> TopLevelComposer<'a> {
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
// ----------- class method and field are analyzed by looking into the class body ast node -----------
|
// class method and field are analyzed by
|
||||||
|
// looking into the class body ast node
|
||||||
for stmt in body {
|
for stmt in body {
|
||||||
if let ast::StmtKind::FunctionDef {
|
if let ast::StmtKind::FunctionDef {
|
||||||
name,
|
name,
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue