Volker, the answer to the balance question. My formatting is that "«balance
(2:1) [0:0] {1:0}»" gives the number of left and right parenthesis, lefdt
and right brackets, and left and right braces in using
"<left-char><left-count>:<right count><right char>":
2019/06/16 17:57:59.844755 files that failed the Go lexical scan:
2019/06/16 17:57:59.844763 bad /Users/mtj/go/test/fixedbugs/bug435.go
«balance (2:1) [0:0] {1:0}»
2019/06/16 17:57:59.844770 bad /Users/mtj/go/test/fixedbugs/issue13248.go
«balance (2:1) [0:0] {1:1}»
2019/06/16 17:57:59.844777 bad /Users/mtj/go/test/fixedbugs/issue13274.go
«balance (1:1) [0:0] {1:0}»
2019/06/16 17:57:59.844784 bad /Users/mtj/go/test/fixedbugs/issue13319.go
«balance (6:4) [0:0] {2:2}»
2019/06/16 17:57:59.844791 bad /Users/mtj/go/test/fixedbugs/issue15611.go
«balance (1:0) [0:0] {0:0}»
2019/06/16 17:57:59.844798 bad /Users/mtj/go/test/fixedbugs/issue17328.go
«balance (1:2) [0:0] {2:2}»
2019/06/16 17:57:59.844805 bad /Users/mtj/go/test/fixedbugs/issue18092.go
«balance (1:1) [0:0] {3:2}»
2019/06/16 17:57:59.844813 bad /Users/mtj/go/test/fixedbugs/issue19667.go
«balance (2:1) [0:0] {1:1}»
2019/06/16 17:57:59.844820 bad /Users/mtj/go/test/fixedbugs/issue20789.go
«balance (1:1) [2:0] {1:0}»
2019/06/16 17:57:59.844827 bad /Users/mtj/go/test/fixedbugs/issue22164.go
«balance (8:6) [1:1] {5:4}»
2019/06/16 17:57:59.844834 bad /Users/mtj/go/test/fixedbugs/issue22581.go
«balance (7:10) [0:3] {7:7}»
2019/06/16 17:57:59.844842 bad /Users/mtj/go/test/syntax/semi1.go
«balance (1:1) [0:0] {2:0}»
2019/06/16 17:57:59.844850 bad /Users/mtj/go/test/syntax/semi2.go
«balance (1:1) [0:0] {2:0}»
2019/06/16 17:57:59.844857 bad /Users/mtj/go/test/syntax/semi3.go
«balance (1:1) [0:0] {2:0}»
2019/06/16 17:57:59.844864 bad /Users/mtj/go/test/syntax/semi4.go
«balance (1:1) [0:0] {2:0}»
2019/06/16 17:57:59.844871 bad /Users/mtj/go/test/syntax/semi5.go
«balance (1:1) [0:0] {1:0}»
2019/06/16 17:57:59.844879 bad /Users/mtj/go/test/syntax/vareq.go
«balance (1:1) [1:1] {2:1}»
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 12:00 AM Michael Jones <michael.jo...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> The "src" subdirectory of go does balance, but building every ".go" file
> in ./go does lose the balance. I sensed your discomfort so I've changed my
> plans a little to take as day to make a flexible command line tool out of
> my go-test so that with it's verbose mode you'll know which files have
> issues. I am here working on it at this very moment...
>
> // Survey gathers and reports simple statistics about Go code by lexical
> analysis
> // Author: Michael Jones
> //
> // Survey files named in the file list of the "-f" argument and then those
> listed in command line
> // arguments. Files may be ".go" files or directories. If a named file is
> a directory then all ".go"
> // files in that directory are surveyed without considering
> subdirectories. With the "-r" flag,
> // named directories are processed recursively, eventually finding and
> surveying each ".go" file in
> // that hierarchy. The verbose argument requests details of individual
> file processing and
> // file system traversal, mentioning files with unbalanced "()[]{}." The
> markdown argument prepares
> // output for pretty display.
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 10:27 PM Volker Dobler <dr.volker.dob...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Wednesday, 12 June 2019 23:48:36 UTC+2, Michael Jones wrote:
>>>
>>> Volker, did you see a few posts back that I did the run Roger asked
>>> about, on RSC’s huge corpus? It is about 10x the size and its parens,
>>> braces, and brackets match just fine, all *7476284* of them....
>>>
>>
>> If I remember the corpus was curated to be buildable, but on
>> the other hand the Go 1.13 codebase in master should be
>> buildable always too, anytime. Weird.
>>
>> V.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 2:13 PM Michael Jones <michae...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> They matched up until yesterday. When I updated at 2am California time
>>>> it changed. It also had no "0o" octal literals up until the latest.
>>>>
>>>> I'd planned to joke how the race was on to be the first to check in a
>>>> new octal literal in my mail, but a few of those snuck in too.
>>>>
>>>> Yesterday:
>>>> Count | Frequency | Detail
>>>> ---:|---:|---
>>>> 929548 | 19.7889% | ,
>>>> 574886 | 12.2386% | .
>>>>
>>>> * 544819 | 11.5985% | ( 544819 | 11.5985% | ) *
>>>>
>>>> * 352547 | 7.5053% | { 352547 | 7.5053% | } *
>>>> 288042 | 6.1321% | =
>>>> 253563 | 5.3980% | :
>>>> 155297 | 3.3061% | :=
>>>>
>>>> *138465 | 2.9478% | [ 138465 | 2.9478% | ] *
>>>> 78567 | 1.6726% | !=
>>>> 72007 | 1.5329% | *
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 1:51 PM Volker Dobler <dr.volk...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Cool work!
>>>>>
>>>>> What I found most astonishing on a first look: Not all
>>>>> parentheses ( are closed: 4 ) seem to be missing??
>>>>> For { 5 are unclosed while there is one more ] than [ ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you parsing testfiles with deliberate errors?
>>>>>
>>>>> V.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wednesday, 12 June 2019 15:08:44 UTC+2, Michael Jones wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've been working on a cascade of projects, each needing the next as
>>>>>> a part, the most recent being rewriting text.Scanner. It was not a goal,
>>>>>> but the existing scanner does not do what I need (recognize Go operators,
>>>>>> number types, and more) and my shim code was nearly as big as the
>>>>>> standard
>>>>>> library scanner itself, so I just sat down an rewrote it cleanly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To test beyond hand-crafted edge cases it seemed good to try it
>>>>>> against a large body of Go code. I chose the Go 1.13 code base, and
>>>>>> because
>>>>>> the results are interesting on their own beyond my purpose of code
>>>>>> testing,
>>>>>> I thought to share what I've noticed as a Github Gist on the subject of
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> "Go Popularity Contest"—what are the most used types, most referenced
>>>>>> packages, most and least popular operators, etc. The data are
>>>>>> interesting,
>>>>>> but I'll let it speak for itself. Find it here:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://gist.github.com/MichaelTJones/ca0fd339401ebbe79b9cbb5044afcfe2
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>
>>>>>> P.S. Generated by go test. I just cut off the "passed" line and
>>>>>> posted it. ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Michael T. jonesmichae...@gmail.com*
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>> Groups "golang-nuts" group.
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>>>> an email to golan...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/1a0e2b4b-9276-4418-929c-51888cf2c93a%40googlegroups.com
>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/1a0e2b4b-9276-4418-929c-51888cf2c93a%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>> .
>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>
>>> *Michael T. jonesmichae...@gmail.com*
>>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "golang-nuts" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/e401f2d7-44e3-400a-846a-6f3276f0698d%40googlegroups.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/e401f2d7-44e3-400a-846a-6f3276f0698d%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>
> --
>
> *Michael T. jonesmichael.jo...@gmail.com <michael.jo...@gmail.com>*
>
--
*Michael T. jonesmichael.jo...@gmail.com <michael.jo...@gmail.com>*
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CALoEmQw6XodJk7se3tKmr-7A-4HfVwmKVqp3xYz24trURdJsJQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
