Add ability to include code in --tla-code and --tla-code-file#175
Merged
lihaoyi-databricks merged 8 commits intomasterfrom Jun 6, 2023
Merged
Add ability to include code in --tla-code and --tla-code-file#175lihaoyi-databricks merged 8 commits intomasterfrom
lihaoyi-databricks merged 8 commits intomasterfrom
Conversation
szeiger
approved these changes
Jun 6, 2023
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Similar to the
--ext-codechanges in #171,--tla-codeis meant to be able to take arbitrary Jsonnet code just like--ext-codecan, and before this PR we limited it to only JSONI refactored out the common
Interpreter#parseVarlogic so it can be shared between both, and added new tests to exercise the new behavior.The
override def evalDefaultfor theVal.Funcused for top-level functions needed to be fixed; there was always a logical issue evaluating the--tla-codeexpression using the main file'sValScope, but it didn't matter since previously we only allowed JSON so there weren't any identifiers to look up using it. Now that there are, the correct thing to do is to evaluate the--tla-codeexpression usingValScope.empty, since it is meant to be a standalone expression without any existing local bindings in its lexical scopeNotably,
--tla-codeexpressions cannot reference each other the way--ext-codeexpressions can, so there is no equivalent to thestdExtVarRecursivetest case. They can still callstdfunctions, so thestdtest case remains