mergiraf/mergiraf
mergiraf/mergiraf
9
213
Fork 45
Code Issues 51 Pull requests 7 Releases 19 Activity Actions

update tree-sitter-dart to the upstream, maintained version #405

Closed
HannesGitH wants to merge 1 commit from HannesGitH/mergiraf:main into main
pull from: HannesGitH/mergiraf:main
merge into: mergiraf:main
Conversation 6 Commits 1 Files changed 2 +3 -4
HannesGitH commented 2025-05-22 12:25:32 +02:00
First-time contributor
Copy link

unfortunately the used tree-sitter-dart crate is a unmaintained, archived fork.

It doesnt understand a large portion of newer dart syntax, like e.g. Records

this pr introduces a much more up-to-date fork

unfortunately the used tree-sitter-dart crate is a unmaintained, archived fork. It doesnt understand a large portion of newer dart syntax, like e.g. Records this pr introduces a much more up-to-date fork
update tree-sitter-dart to the upstream, maintained version
Some checks failed
/ test (pull_request) Failing after 1m44s
Details
cfb6b09b59
ada4a commented 2025-05-22 12:36:18 +02:00
Owner
Copy link

One problem with this is that we wouldn't be able to publish a new version of Mergiraf to Crates.io with a dependency specified like this (with a bare git revision). But I guess users of Dart would be able to at least build Mergiraf from source off of this branch in order to have access to the better-maintained repo

One problem with this is that we wouldn't be able to publish a new version of Mergiraf to Crates.io with a dependency specified like this (with a bare git revision). But I guess users of Dart would be able to at least build Mergiraf from source off of this branch in order to have access to the better-maintained repo
👍 2
ada4a commented 2025-05-22 16:11:15 +02:00
Owner
Copy link

Oh and the test failure looks interesting? Not sure whether it's a bug in Mergiraf or in this new grammar

Oh and the test failure looks interesting? Not sure whether it's a bug in Mergiraf or in this new grammar
ada4a commented 2025-05-22 16:13:15 +02:00
Owner
Copy link

Totally forgot – welcome and thanks for the PR!

Totally forgot – welcome and thanks for the PR!
HannesGitH commented 2025-05-22 17:59:51 +02:00
Author
First-time contributor
Copy link

@ada4a wrote in #405 (comment):

Totally forgot – welcome and thanks for the PR!

hehe thanks!

Oh and the test failure looks interesting? Not sure whether it's a bug in Mergiraf or in this new grammar

yep, didnt have the time to dig deeper tho, had to overrideAttrs {doCheck = false;} in my config but at least it works for now, i'll keep you posted

@ada4a wrote in https://codeberg.org/mergiraf/mergiraf/pulls/405#issuecomment-4802778: > Totally forgot – welcome and thanks for the PR! hehe thanks! > Oh and the test failure looks interesting? Not sure whether it's a bug in Mergiraf or in this new grammar yep, didnt have the time to dig deeper tho, had to `overrideAttrs {doCheck = false;}` in my config but at least it works for now, i'll keep you posted
wetneb commented 2025-07-09 11:02:25 +02:00
Owner
Copy link

I'm idly considering forking this grammar into the grammar-orchard to get this unblocked. If anyone wants to do it, I'd be happy to support.

I'm idly considering forking this grammar into the [grammar-orchard](https://codeberg.org/grammar-orchard) to get this unblocked. If anyone wants to do it, I'd be happy to support.
wetneb commented 2025-08-01 23:20:20 +02:00
Owner
Copy link

Closing in favour of #557.

Closing in favour of #557.
wetneb closed this pull request 2025-08-01 23:20:21 +02:00
Some checks failed
/ test (pull_request) Failing after 1m44s
Details

Pull request closed

Please reopen this pull request to perform a merge.
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
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
3 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#405
No description provided.
Delete branch "HannesGitH/mergiraf:main"

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?