[compiler] Support method-call version of macro functions #29899
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
[ghstack-poisoned]
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
facebook-github-bot
added
CLA Signed
React Core Team
|
Comparing: a07f5a3...b223c3a Critical size changesIncludes critical production bundles, as well as any change greater than 2%:
Significant size changesIncludes any change greater than 0.2%: Expand to show
|
Adds fixtures for `macro.namespace(...)` style invocations which we use internally in some cases instead of just `macro(...)`. I tried every example i could think of that could possibly break it (including basing one off of another fixture where we hit an invariant related due to a temporary being emitted for a method call), and they all worked. I just had to fix an existing bug where we early return in some cases instead of continuing, which is a holdover from when this pass was originally written as a ReactiveFunction visitor. [ghstack-poisoned]
josephsavona
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 14, 2024
Adds fixtures for `macro.namespace(...)` style invocations which we use internally in some cases instead of just `macro(...)`. I tried every example i could think of that could possibly break it (including basing one off of another fixture where we hit an invariant related due to a temporary being emitted for a method call), and they all worked. I just had to fix an existing bug where we early return in some cases instead of continuing, which is a holdover from when this pass was originally written as a ReactiveFunction visitor. ghstack-source-id: c01f45b Pull Request resolved: #29899
mofeiZ
approved these changes
Jun 17, 2024
josephsavona
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 17, 2024
Adds fixtures for `macro.namespace(...)` style invocations which we use internally in some cases instead of just `macro(...)`. I tried every example i could think of that could possibly break it (including basing one off of another fixture where we hit an invariant related due to a temporary being emitted for a method call), and they all worked. I just had to fix an existing bug where we early return in some cases instead of continuing, which is a holdover from when this pass was originally written as a ReactiveFunction visitor. ghstack-source-id: c01f45b Pull Request resolved: #29899
This was referenced Jul 25, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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.
Stack from ghstack (oldest at bottom):
Adds fixtures for
macro.namespace(...)style invocations which we use internally in some cases instead of justmacro(...). I tried every example i could think of that could possibly break it (including basing one off of another fixture where we hit an invariant related due to a temporary being emitted for a method call), and they all worked. I just had to fix an existing bug where we early return in some cases instead of continuing, which is a holdover from when this pass was originally written as a ReactiveFunction visitor.