Fix reserved parser keyword error reporting#869
Merged
Conversation
16fd1a8 to
bc9b699
Compare
jcp19
reviewed
Feb 28, 2025
jcp19
approved these changes
Feb 28, 2025
Contributor
jcp19
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, I just have a question about an assumption that the code makes
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
This PR addresses a bug discovered by @felixlinker where our parser just reports "no viable alternative at input '(proof'
func test(proof ProofType)" for the following input, thus, making it hard to spot that
proofis a reserved word. While our parse error listener already supports pointing out reserved words, the list of reserved words was outdated. I hope to prevent similar bugs in the future by corresponding notes inGobraLexer.g4.