Type name can be in either a node attribute or a child node - should be one or the other about delphiast HOT 5 CLOSED

I agree, new child node seems overkill. But also please note, that the following case is possible. Thus classes/interfaces may have an attribute and a child node.

type
  TIntList = class(TList<Integer>)
  end;

  <TYPEDECL line="9" col="1" name="TIntList" type="class">
    <TYPE line="9" col="15" name="TList">
      <TYPEARGS line="9" col="21">
        <TYPE line="9" col="21" name="Integer"/>
      </TYPEARGS>
    </TYPE>
  </TYPEDECL>

Do you agree? I can work on this, but also I'll be happy if you fix this :)

from delphiast.

Having a child node for the ancestor / inherited-from type makes sense - in fact, if there is a child node for the name of the type itself, that could get potentially confusing.

So, for the name of the type that is being declared, a 'name' attribute is the best solution? Then type child nodes would indicate inheritance.

I haven't done any coding at all in DelphiAST yet and I'm keen to fix at least one bug, or add one feature, just to get into the codebase. Unless this is urgent or likely to be very difficult to fix, would you mind if I had a go at working on it?

from delphiast.

Yes, go ahead :)

from delphiast.

Nice one for diving in head first @vintagedave :)

from delphiast.

I am afraid I have not had time to look at this yet. I don't want to hold
it up; Roman, if you want to change it please do. I'll pick something else
for my first commit :)

On 18 March 2015 at 14:48, LaKraven Studios Ltd [email protected]
wrote:

Nice one for diving in head first @vintagedave
https://github.com/vintagedave :)

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#58 (comment)
.

from delphiast.