debug inspect about ast HOT 12 CLOSED

Ideally, to_s would return the current representation and inspect would return yours; however, I don't know how many people rely on the return values being what they are, and it's probably not worth a major version bump.

from ast.

Data point: I do not rely on AST::Node#to_s or #inspect format in my projects.

from ast.

What about @bbatsov?

from ast.

my idea was that you only get it when you want it.
One could decouple it from including the Sexp and make different module if there are concerns.

from ast.

It is definitely a past design failure in ast.

from ast.

I'm on the road right now. Will be back home tomorrow and I'll take a look
then.

On Tuesday, September 15, 2015, whitequark [email protected] wrote:

It is definitely a past design failure in ast.

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

Best Regards,
Bozhidar Batsov

http://www.batsov.com

from ast.

After having used this a bit more, i actually reverted to the multiline version. (wasn't before)
It now outputs exactly what is written in the module comment.
Even in ruby code, that can still be pasted, as the comma at the end continues the expression.
(though i personally changed to text files, less clutter)
https://github.com/dancinglightning/ast/commit/846eb00aeb6d227ffbae7a3f5c3b286f60d11667

from ast.

Ideally, to_s would return the current representation and inspect would return yours; however, I don't know how many people rely on the return values being what they are, and it's probably not worth a major version bump.

I'm not using this is as well, so I think making this change is unlikely to affect many (any) users.

from ast.

OK. I will accept a PR implementing this as per #6 (comment).

from ast.

ok, do you want it in the sexp module (as my code is now), or should i change the node.to_sexp to output ruby code ?

from ast.

No, no modules. Just inspect (outputting the code) and to_s (aliased to to_sexp).

from ast.

i guess this is clear

from ast.