Hi Mariano,
Le 09/11/2015 01:13, Mariano Martinez Peck a écrit :
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
...
Hi Thierry,
I am trying to achieve a similar case like the one I commented in this
post but I am unable to find the way.
Previously I wanted to replace say the literal #oldSelector to
#newSelector. Now, I need to use regular expressions. I mean, I would
need to find matches of '*oldSelector*' and do the replace with
'newSelector'. For example, the search may find
'*pre*oldSelector*post*' and I want it to be replaced by
'*pre*newSelector*post'. *And of course, I don't know in advance what
pre and post strings there could be.
What you need to do there is to use a match block after the @selector
`{:node | node selector matches: '.*oldSelector.*'}
Which would mean that your patterns become:
rewriter
replace: '``@object `oldSelector {:node | node selector matches:
'.*oldSelector.*'}'
with: '``@object `newSelector {:node | node selector }'.
Wait, not entirely sure. I think you need to add a dictionary in the
block to give the with: argument the pre and post string. And I'm not
sure about the regular expression above as well.
I need to have access to the SmaCC code source, so I'll answer to you a
bit later.
Also..do you know where can I find some more info about RB? For example,
if I read this:
rewriter
replace: '``@object ' , oldSeletor
with: '``@object ' , newSelector.
Where can I read that ``@object means XXX .. ?
There is a first level of explanation in the Pharo for the Enterprise
book; but, yes the pattern language is fairly complex.
Are you going to Smalltalks? John Brant is there and will give a talk on
RB and SmaCC (two talks, I believe).
Thierry
Thanks in advance!
Or a cascade: a RBParseTreeSearcher which matches blocks; on
each block node you activate a rewriter.
However, there is an issue in rewriting blocks contents, because
it supposes that the method defining the block is recompiled;
it's significantly harder to make changes to the code of live
blocks (change the bytescode itself? What if the block has
multiples instances?).
Thierry
If not, I think my easiest path is to automatically compile
dummy/temporal classes/methods from the rules, perform the
refactor, then move source from methods to block closures,
and finally remove created classes.
Any pointer is appreciated.
best,
--
Mariano
http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
--
Mariano
http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
--
Mariano
http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
