mergiraf/mergiraf
mergiraf/mergiraf
9
213
Fork 45
Code Issues 50 Pull requests 6 Releases 19 Activity Actions

chore: Switch to tree-sitter-java-orchard #546

Merged
ada4a merged 2 commits from 540-upgrade-java-parser into main 2025-08-01 08:04:01 +02:00
Conversation 5 Commits 2 Files changed 6 +15 -36
wetneb commented 2025-07-28 15:23:08 +02:00
Owner
Copy link

Fixes a bunch of parsing failures and introduces fields for #540.

Fixes a bunch of parsing failures and introduces fields for #540.
chore: Switch to tree-sitter-java-orchard
All checks were successful
/ test (pull_request) Successful in 1m42s
Details
b4726d7d80 
Fixes a bunch of parsing failures and introduces fields for #540.
wetneb reviewed 2025-07-28 15:25:18 +02:00
examples/spork/failing/method_visibility_left_empty/ExpectedCurrently.java Outdated
@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
class Cls {
final protected static void method() {}
wetneb commented 2025-07-28 15:23:51 +02:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

This is linked to #545. I plan to revisit this later.

This is linked to https://codeberg.org/mergiraf/mergiraf/issues/545. I plan to revisit this later.
src/supported_langs.rs Outdated
@ -135,4 +120,0 @@
"non-sealed",
],
" ",
),
wetneb commented 2025-07-28 15:24:52 +02:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

Nice simplification due to https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter-java/pull/211 which I integrated in the fork.

Nice simplification due to https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter-java/pull/211 which I integrated in the fork.
👍 1
ada4a marked this conversation as resolved
src/tree_matcher.rs Outdated
@ -549,2 +549,2 @@
assert_eq!(matching.recovery.len(), 18);
assert_eq!(matching.full.len(), 39);
assert_eq!(matching.recovery.len(), 20);
assert_eq!(matching.full.len(), 41);
wetneb commented 2025-07-28 15:25:13 +02:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

This is a side-effect of https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter-java/pull/211.

This is a side-effect of https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter-java/pull/211.
👍 1
ada4a marked this conversation as resolved
wetneb commented 2025-07-28 18:15:24 +02:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

Interestingly, this seems to have caused a significant slowdown… I'm not sure if it's because my computer was more busy when I ran the second benchmark, of if it's a real issue.
And it's a bit disappointing that it's only solving one parse error. I'll investigate at some point.

Language Cases Exact Format Conflict Differ Parse Panic Time (s)
*.java 34,530 +4 (+0.0%) -4 (-0.0%) -3 (-0.0%) +3 (+0.0%) -1 (-0.0%) +1 (+0.0%) +0.015 (+17.9%)
↓ Before \ After → Exact Format Conflict Differ Parse Panic
Exact 2,516 1
Format 1,087 2 2
Conflict 3 28,272 6 1
Differ 2 3 2,615
Parse 1 17
Panic 2
Interestingly, this seems to have caused a significant slowdown… I'm not sure if it's because my computer was more busy when I ran the second benchmark, of if it's a real issue. And it's a bit disappointing that it's only solving one parse error. I'll investigate at some point. | Language | Cases | Exact | Format | Conflict | Differ | Parse | Panic | Time (s) | | -------- | ----- | ----- | ------ | -------- | ------ | ----- | ----- | -------- | | `*.java` | 34,530 | +4 **(+0.0%)** | -4 **(-0.0%)** | -3 **(-0.0%)** | +3 **(+0.0%)** | -1 **(-0.0%)** | +1 **(+0.0%)** | +0.015 (+17.9%) | | ↓ Before \ After → | Exact | Format | Conflict | Differ | Parse | Panic | | ------------------ | ----- | ------ | -------- | ------ | ----- | ----- | | Exact | 2,516 | | **1** | | | | | Format | | 1,087 | **2** | **2** | | | | Conflict | **3** | | 28,272 | **6** | | **1** | | Differ | **2** | | **3** | 2,615 | | | | Parse | | | **1** | | 17 | | | Panic | | | | | | 2 |
wetneb commented 2025-07-31 18:48:15 +02:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

So, I have some good news: the timing difference is spurious, due to me suspending my computer during the benchmark and it inflating the running time of one example. The updated table is:

Language Cases Exact Format Conflict Differ Parse Panic Time (s)
*.java 34,529 +4 (+0.0%) -4 (-0.0%) -3 (-0.0%) +3 (+0.0%) -1 (-0.0%) +1 (+0.0%) 0.082 (+0)

Then, another piece of "good" news, is that the case that changed from "Conflict" to "Panic" with this change is a new type of panic we didn't know before!

thread '<unnamed>' panicked at src/tree_builder.rs:281:22:
internal error: entered unreachable code: unexpected conflict size: more than two diverging sides!

It probably doesn't have much to do with the grammar update on its own and probably happens in other circumstances, so I'm excited that the benchmark picked it up. And I get to use the minimizer again, yay!

So, I have some good news: the timing difference is spurious, due to me suspending my computer during the benchmark and it inflating the running time of one example. The updated table is: | Language | Cases | Exact | Format | Conflict | Differ | Parse | Panic | Time (s) | | -------- | ----- | ----- | ------ | -------- | ------ | ----- | ----- | -------- | | `*.java` | 34,529 | +4 **(+0.0%)** | -4 **(-0.0%)** | -3 **(-0.0%)** | +3 **(+0.0%)** | -1 **(-0.0%)** | +1 **(+0.0%)** | 0.082 (+0) | Then, another piece of "good" news, is that the case that changed from "Conflict" to "Panic" with this change is a new type of panic we didn't know before! ``` thread '<unnamed>' panicked at src/tree_builder.rs:281:22: internal error: entered unreachable code: unexpected conflict size: more than two diverging sides! ``` It probably doesn't have much to do with the grammar update on its own and probably happens in other circumstances, so I'm excited that the benchmark picked it up. And I get to use the minimizer again, yay!
Add signature to annotations
All checks were successful
/ test (pull_request) Successful in 37s
Details
9bb6ae70f9
wetneb force-pushed 540-upgrade-java-parser from 9bb6ae70f9 to a9b415fee6 2025-07-31 19:08:57 +02:00 Compare
wetneb commented 2025-07-31 23:55:53 +02:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

I have run a new benchmark after rebasing on top of main and adding the signature for annotation_marker nodes. The picture is quite different!

Language Cases Exact Format Conflict Differ Parse Panic Time (s)
*.java 34,530 +6 (+0.0%) +4 (+0.0%) +0 -10 (-0.0%) +0 +0 0.080 (+0)
↓ Before \ After → Exact Format Conflict Differ Parse Panic
Exact 2,521
Format 1,088
Conflict 28,282
Differ 6 4 2,612
Parse 14
Panic 3

The good news is that the change is now entirely positive (only numbers below the diagonal), with mergiraf only solving more conflicts in ways that are consistent with the observed merges.
The panic noticed above is still happening, both before and after this PR. So I think we can merge this and handle the panic separately (I'm on it).

I have run a new benchmark after rebasing on top of main and adding the signature for `annotation_marker` nodes. The picture is quite different! | Language | Cases | Exact | Format | Conflict | Differ | Parse | Panic | Time (s) | | -------- | ----- | ----- | ------ | -------- | ------ | ----- | ----- | -------- | | `*.java` | 34,530 | +6 **(+0.0%)** | +4 **(+0.0%)** | +0 | -10 **(-0.0%)** | +0 | +0 | 0.080 (+0) | | ↓ Before \ After → | Exact | Format | Conflict | Differ | Parse | Panic | | ------------------ | ----- | ------ | -------- | ------ | ----- | ----- | | Exact | 2,521 | | | | | | | Format | | 1,088 | | | | | | Conflict | | | 28,282 | | | | | Differ | **6** | **4** | | 2,612 | | | | Parse | | | | | 14 | | | Panic | | | | | | 3 | The good news is that the change is now entirely positive (only numbers below the diagonal), with mergiraf only solving more conflicts in ways that are consistent with the observed merges. The panic noticed above is still happening, both before and after this PR. So I think we can merge this and handle the panic separately (I'm on it).
ada4a commented 2025-08-01 08:03:00 +02:00
Owner
Copy link

Oh, very nice!

Oh, very nice!
ada4a approved these changes 2025-08-01 08:03:38 +02:00
ada4a merged commit dabfbc475f into main 2025-08-01 08:04:01 +02:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
ada4a
Labels
Clear labels   
Compat/Breaking

Breaking change that won't be backward compatible

  
Kind
Bad merge
Examples where the merging algorithm doesn't work as well as it should

  
Kind
Bug
Something is not working

  
Kind
Documentation
Documentation changes

  
Kind
Enhancement
Improve existing functionality

  
Kind
Feature
New functionality

  
Kind
New language

  
Kind
Security
This is security issue

  
Kind
Testing
Issue or pull request related to testing

  
Priority
Critical
The priority is critical

  
Priority
High
The priority is high

  
Priority
Low
The priority is low

  
Priority
Medium
The priority is medium

  
Reviewed
Confirmed
Issue has been confirmed

  
Reviewed
Duplicate
This issue or pull request already exists

  
Reviewed
Invalid
Invalid issue

  
Reviewed
Won't Fix
This issue won't be fixed

  
Status
Abandoned
Somebody has started to work on this but abandoned work

  
Status
Blocked
Something is blocking this issue or pull request

  
Status
Need More Info
Feedback is required to reproduce issue or to continue work

No labels
Compat/Breaking
Kind
Bad merge
Kind
Bug
Kind
Documentation
Kind
Enhancement
Kind
Feature
Kind
New language
Kind
Security
Kind
Testing
Priority
Critical
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Medium
Reviewed
Confirmed
Reviewed
Duplicate
Reviewed
Invalid
Reviewed
Won't Fix
Status
Abandoned
Status
Blocked
Status
Need More Info
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
2 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: mergiraf/mergiraf#546
No description provided.
Delete branch "540-upgrade-java-parser"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?