Fix: Leading comments for anonymous classes (fixes: #158) #162
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
This PR probably fixes #155 also, but I didn't write a test for it. Please wait... |
mysticatea
force-pushed
the
fix-comment-attachment-for-anonymouse-class
branch
from
6ace498
to
d535900
Compare
|
OK, I added a test for #155. |
|
LGTM |
nzakas
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 10, 2015
…onymouse-class Fix: Leading comments for anonymous classes (fixes: #158)
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The comment attachment process looks below:
In this (#158) case, since the
ClassDeclarationdoes not have itsIdentifier, theIdentifierof the firstMethodDefinitiongets the comment of the class.And the
Identifiergets also the comment of the method.Next, the
MethodDefinitiongets the comments from theIdentifier.The
ClassBodynode does not get the comments from theMethodDefinition, because the last leading comment of theMethodDefinitionis not before theClassBodynode. But the comment of the class is in the leading comments of theMethodDefinition.So, I modified step 2 of the process.