Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into merge
This commit is contained in:
Rob Blanckaert
commit
44a5cb6d52
|
|
@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
|
|||
#include <type_traits>
|
||||
#include <initializer_list>
|
||||
#include <stddef.h>
|
||||
#include <utility>
|
||||
|
||||
namespace Luau
|
||||
{
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1018,18 +1018,20 @@ static int luauF_tunpack(lua_State* L, StkId res, TValue* arg0, int nresults, St
|
|||
|
||||
static int luauF_vector(lua_State* L, StkId res, TValue* arg0, int nresults, StkId args, int nparams)
|
||||
{
|
||||
#if LUA_VECTOR_SIZE == 4
|
||||
if (nparams >= 4 && nresults <= 1 && ttisnumber(arg0) && ttisnumber(args) && ttisnumber(args + 1) && ttisnumber(args + 2))
|
||||
#else
|
||||
if (nparams >= 3 && nresults <= 1 && ttisnumber(arg0) && ttisnumber(args) && ttisnumber(args + 1))
|
||||
#endif
|
||||
{
|
||||
double x = nvalue(arg0);
|
||||
double y = nvalue(args);
|
||||
double z = nvalue(args + 1);
|
||||
|
||||
#if LUA_VECTOR_SIZE == 4
|
||||
double w = nvalue(args + 2);
|
||||
double w = 0.0;
|
||||
if (nparams >= 4)
|
||||
{
|
||||
if (!ttisnumber(args + 2))
|
||||
return -1;
|
||||
w = nvalue(args + 2);
|
||||
}
|
||||
setvvalue(res, float(x), float(y), float(z), float(w));
|
||||
#else
|
||||
setvvalue(res, float(x), float(y), float(z), 0.0f);
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -15,26 +15,12 @@ This document tracks unimplemented RFCs.
|
|||
|
||||
**Status**: Needs implementation
|
||||
|
||||
## Safe navigation operator
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC: Safe navigation postfix operator (?)](https://github.com/Roblox/luau/blob/master/rfcs/syntax-safe-navigation-operator.md)
|
||||
|
||||
**Status**: Needs implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
**Notes**: We have unresolved issues with interaction between this feature and Roblox instance hierarchy. This may affect the viability of this proposal.
|
||||
|
||||
## String interpolation
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC: String interpolation](https://github.com/Roblox/luau/blob/master/rfcs/syntax-string-interpolation.md)
|
||||
|
||||
**Status**: Needs implementation
|
||||
|
||||
## Generalized iteration
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC: Generalized iteration](https://github.com/Roblox/luau/blob/master/rfcs/generalized-iteration.md)
|
||||
|
||||
**Status**: Implemented but not fully rolled out yet.
|
||||
|
||||
## Lower Bounds Calculation
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC: Lower bounds calculation](https://github.com/Roblox/luau/blob/master/rfcs/lower-bounds-calculation.md)
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
|
|||
# Generalized iteration
|
||||
|
||||
**Status**: Implemented
|
||||
|
||||
## Summary
|
||||
|
||||
Introduce support for iterating over tables without using `pairs`/`ipairs` as well as a generic customization point for iteration via `__iter` metamethod.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,104 +0,0 @@
|
|||
# Safe navigation postfix operator (?)
|
||||
|
||||
**Note**: We have unresolved issues with interaction between this feature and Roblox instance hierarchy. This may affect the viability of this proposal.
|
||||
|
||||
## Summary
|
||||
|
||||
Introduce syntax to navigate through `nil` values, or short-circuit with `nil` if it was encountered.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Motivation
|
||||
|
||||
nil values are very common in Lua, and take care to prevent runtime errors.
|
||||
|
||||
Currently, attempting to index `dog.name` while caring for `dog` being nil requires some form of the following:
|
||||
|
||||
```lua
|
||||
local dogName = nil
|
||||
if dog ~= nil then
|
||||
dogName = dog.name
|
||||
end
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
...or the unusual to read...
|
||||
|
||||
```lua
|
||||
local dogName = dog and dog.name
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
...which will return `false` if `dog` is `false`, instead of throwing an error because of the index of `false.name`.
|
||||
|
||||
Luau provides the if...else expression making this turn into:
|
||||
|
||||
```lua
|
||||
local dogName = if dog == nil then nil else dog.name
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
...but this is fairly clunky for such a common expression.
|
||||
|
||||
## Design
|
||||
|
||||
The safe navigation operator will make all of these smooth, by supporting `x?.y` to safely index nil values. `dog?.name` would resolve to `nil` if `dog` was nil, or the name otherwise.
|
||||
|
||||
The previous example turns into `local dogName = dog?.name` (or just using `dog?.name` elsewhere).
|
||||
|
||||
Failing the nil-safety check early would make the entire expression nil, for instance `dog?.body.legs` would resolve to `nil` if `dog` is nil, rather than resolve `dog?.body` into nil, then turning into `nil.legs`.
|
||||
|
||||
```lua
|
||||
dog?.name --[[ is the same as ]] if dog == nil then nil else dog.name
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
The short-circuiting is limited within the expression.
|
||||
|
||||
```lua
|
||||
dog?.owner.name -- This will return nil if `dog` is nil
|
||||
(dog?.owner).name -- `(dog?.owner)` resolves to nil, of which `name` is then indexed. This will error at runtime if `dog` is nil.
|
||||
|
||||
dog?.legs + 3 -- `dog?.legs` is resolved on its own, meaning this will error at runtime if it is nil (`nil + 3`)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
The operator must be used in the context of either a call or an index, and so:
|
||||
|
||||
```lua
|
||||
local value = x?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
...would be invalid syntax.
|
||||
|
||||
This syntax would be based on expressions, and not identifiers, meaning that `(x or y)?.call()` would be valid syntax.
|
||||
|
||||
### Type
|
||||
If the expression is typed as an optional, then the resulting type would be the final expression, also optional. Otherwise, it'll just be the resulting type if `?` wasn't used.
|
||||
|
||||
```lua
|
||||
local optionalObject: { name: string }?
|
||||
local optionalObjectName = optionalObject?.name -- resolves to `string?`
|
||||
|
||||
local nonOptionalObject: { name: string }
|
||||
local nonOptionalObjectName = nonOptionalObject?.name -- resolves to `string`
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Calling
|
||||
|
||||
This RFC only specifies `x?.y` as an index method. `x?:y()` is currently unspecified, and `x?.y(args)` as a syntax will be reserved (will error if you try to use it).
|
||||
|
||||
While being able to support `dog?.getName()` is useful, it provides [some logistical issues for the language](https://github.com/Roblox/luau/pull/142#issuecomment-990563536).
|
||||
|
||||
`x?.y(args)` will be reserved both so that this can potentially be resolved later down the line if something comes up, but also because it would be a guaranteed runtime error under this RFC: `dog?.getName()` will first index `dog?.getName`, which will return nil, then will attempt to call it.
|
||||
|
||||
### Assignment
|
||||
`x?.y = z` is not supported, and will be reported as a syntax error.
|
||||
|
||||
## Drawbacks
|
||||
|
||||
As with all syntax additions, this adds complexity to the parsing of expressions, and the execution of cancelling the rest of the expression could prove challenging.
|
||||
|
||||
Furthermore, with the proposed syntax, it might lock off other uses of `?` within code (and not types) for the future as being ambiguous.
|
||||
|
||||
## Alternatives
|
||||
|
||||
Doing nothing is an option, as current standard if-checks already work, as well as the `and` trick in other use cases, but as shown before this can create some hard to read code, and nil values are common enough that the safe navigation operator is welcome.
|
||||
|
||||
Supporting optional calls/indexes, such as `x?[1]` and `x?()`, while not out of scope, are likely too fringe to support, while adding on a significant amount of parsing difficulty, especially in the case of shorthand function calls, such as `x?{}` and `x?""`.
|
||||
|
||||
It is possible to make `x?.y = z` resolve to only setting `x.y` if `x` is nil, but assignments silently failing can be seen as surprising.
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue