Add permissive flag for parse routine
#26
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Collaborator
Author
|
I think the test failures are due to |
hodgestar
reviewed
Jul 23, 2024
braised-babbage
force-pushed
the
non-permissive-parse
branch
from
fb71e5a to
ec956f3
Compare
hodgestar
approved these changes
Aug 2, 2024
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Here we add a
permissiveflag forparseandparse_openpulse. This closes #25You can see the difference in behavior in the tests. What's particularly concerning about
permissive=Trueare silent failures with that depend on the details of how our AST visitor is written, but I don't have a test case for those.