kotovalexarian-likes-github/ruby--ruby
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/ruby/ruby.git synced 2022-11-09 12:17:21 -05:00
Code Releases Activity
ruby--ruby/spec/ruby/language/precedence_spec.rb
eregon fc1f3f14d3 Update to ruby/spec@41068a6 
* Only small fixes to specs from CRuby to review the diff more easily.

git-svn-id: svn+ssh://ci.ruby-lang.org/ruby/trunk@63767 b2dd03c8-39d4-4d8f-98ff-823fe69b080e
2018-06-27 11:37:31 +00:00

449 lines
14 KiB
Ruby
Raw Blame History

require_relative '../spec_helper'
require_relative 'fixtures/precedence'
# Specifying the behavior of operators in combination could
# lead to combinatorial explosion. A better way seems to be
# to use a technique from formal proofs that involve a set of
# equivalent statements. Suppose you have statements A, B, C.
# If they are claimed to be equivalent, this can be shown by
# proving that A implies B, B implies C, and C implies A.
# (Actually any closed circuit of implications.)
#
# Here, we can use a similar technique where we show starting
# at the top that each level of operator has precedence over
# the level below (as well as showing associativity within
# the precedence level).
=begin
Excerpted from 'Programming Ruby: The Pragmatic Programmer's Guide'
Second Edition by Dave Thomas, Chad Fowler, and Andy Hunt, page 324
Table 22.4. Ruby operators (high to low precedence)
Method Operator Description
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
:: .
x* [ ] [ ]= Element reference, element set
x ** Exponentiation
x ! ~ + - Not, complement, unary plus and minus
(method names for the last two are +@ and -@)
x * / % Multiply, divide, and modulo
x + - Plus and minus
x >> << Right and left shift
x & “And” (bitwise for integers)
x ^ | Exclusive “or” and regular “or” (bitwise for integers)
x <= < > >= Comparison operators
x <=> == === != =~ !~ Equality and pattern match operators (!=
and !~ may not be defined as methods)
&& Logical “and”
|| Logical “or”
.. ... Range (inclusive and exclusive)
? : Ternary if-then-else
= %= /= -= += |= &= Assignment
>>= <<= *= &&= ||= **=
defined? Check if symbol defined
not Logical negation
or and Logical composition
if unless while until Expression modifiers
begin/end Block expression
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* Operators marked with 'x' in the Method column are implemented as methods
and can be overridden (except != and !~ as noted). (But see the specs
below for implementations that define != and !~ as methods.)
** These are not included in the excerpted table but are shown here for
completeness.
=end
# -----------------------------------------------------------------------
# It seems that this table is not correct anymore
# The correct table derived from MRI's parse.y is as follows:
#
# Operator Assoc Description
#---------------------------------------------------------------
# ! ~ + > Not, complement, unary plus
# ** > Exponentiation
# - > Unary minus
# * / % < Multiply, divide, and modulo
# + - < Plus and minus
# >> << < Right and left shift
# & < “And” (bitwise for integers)
# ^ | < Exclusive “or” and regular “or” (bitwise for integers)
# <= < > >= < Comparison operators
# <=> == === != =~ !~ no Equality and pattern match operators (!=
# and !~ may not be defined as methods)
# && < Logical “and”
# || < Logical “or”
# .. ... no Range (inclusive and exclusive)
# ? : > Ternary if-then-else
# rescue < Rescue modifier
# = %= /= -= += |= &= > Assignment
# >>= <<= *= &&= ||= **=
# defined? no Check if symbol defined
# not > Logical negation
# or and < Logical composition
# if unless while until no Expression modifiers
# -----------------------------------------------------------------------
#
# [] and []= seem to fall out of here, as well as begin/end
#
# TODO: Resolve these two tables with actual specs. As the comment at the
# top suggests, these specs need to be reorganized into a single describe
# block for each operator. The describe block should include an example
# for associativity (if relevant), an example for any short circuit behavior
# (e.g. &&, ||, etc.) and an example block for each operator over which the
# instant operator has immediately higher precedence.
describe "Operators" do
it "! ~ + is right-associative" do
(!!true).should == true
(~~0).should == 0
(++2).should == 2
end
it "** is right-associative" do
(2**2**3).should == 256
end
it "** has higher precedence than unary minus" do
(-2**2).should == -4
end
it "unary minus is right-associative" do
(--2).should == 2
end
it "unary minus has higher precedence than * / %" do
class UnaryMinusTest; def -@; 50; end; end
b = UnaryMinusTest.new
(-b * 5).should == 250
(-b / 5).should == 10
(-b % 7).should == 1
end
it "treats +/- as a regular send if the arguments are known locals or block locals" do
a = PrecedenceSpecs::NonUnaryOpTest.new
a.add_num(1).should == [3]
a.sub_num(1).should == [1]
a.add_str.should == ['11']
a.add_var.should == [2]
end
it "* / % are left-associative" do
(2*1/2).should == (2*1)/2
# Guard against the Mathn library
# TODO: Make these specs not rely on specific behaviour / result values
# by using mocks.
conflicts_with :Prime do
(2*1/2).should_not == 2*(1/2)
end
(10/7/5).should == (10/7)/5
(10/7/5).should_not == 10/(7/5)
(101 % 55 % 7).should == (101 % 55) % 7
(101 % 55 % 7).should_not == 101 % (55 % 7)
(50*20/7%42).should == ((50*20)/7)%42
(50*20/7%42).should_not == 50*(20/(7%42))
end
it "* / % have higher precedence than + -" do
(2+2*2).should == 6
(1+10/5).should == 3
(2+10%5).should == 2
(2-2*2).should == -2
(1-10/5).should == -1
(10-10%4).should == 8
end
it "+ - are left-associative" do
(2-3-4).should == -5
(4-3+2).should == 3
binary_plus = Class.new(String) do
alias_method :plus, :+
def +(a)
plus(a) + "!"
end
end
s = binary_plus.new("a")
(s+s+s).should == (s+s)+s
(s+s+s).should_not == s+(s+s)
end
it "+ - have higher precedence than >> <<" do
(2<<1+2).should == 16
(8>>1+2).should == 1
(4<<1-3).should == 1
(2>>1-3).should == 8
end
it ">> << are left-associative" do
(1 << 2 << 3).should == 32
(10 >> 1 >> 1).should == 2
(10 << 4 >> 1).should == 80
end
it ">> << have higher precedence than &" do
(4 & 2 << 1).should == 4
(2 & 4 >> 1).should == 2
end
it "& is left-associative" do
class BitwiseAndTest; def &(a); a+1; end; end
c = BitwiseAndTest.new
(c & 5 & 2).should == (c & 5) & 2
(c & 5 & 2).should_not == c & (5 & 2)
end
it "& has higher precedence than ^ |" do
(8 ^ 16 & 16).should == 24
(8 | 16 & 16).should == 24
end
it "^ | are left-associative" do
class OrAndXorTest; def ^(a); a+10; end; def |(a); a-10; end; end
d = OrAndXorTest.new
(d ^ 13 ^ 16).should == (d ^ 13) ^ 16
(d ^ 13 ^ 16).should_not == d ^ (13 ^ 16)
(d | 13 | 4).should == (d | 13) | 4
(d | 13 | 4).should_not == d | (13 | 4)
end
it "^ | have higher precedence than <= < > >=" do
(10 <= 7 ^ 7).should == false
(10 < 7 ^ 7).should == false
(10 > 7 ^ 7).should == true
(10 >= 7 ^ 7).should == true
(10 <= 7 | 7).should == false
(10 < 7 | 7).should == false
(10 > 7 | 7).should == true
(10 >= 7 | 7).should == true
end
it "<= < > >= are left-associative" do
class ComparisonTest
def <=(a); 0; end;
def <(a); 0; end;
def >(a); 0; end;
def >=(a); 0; end;
end
e = ComparisonTest.new
(e <= 0 <= 1).should == (e <= 0) <= 1
(e <= 0 <= 1).should_not == e <= (0 <= 1)
(e < 0 < 1).should == (e < 0) < 1
(e < 0 < 1).should_not == e < (0 < 1)
(e >= 0 >= 1).should == (e >= 0) >= 1
(e >= 0 >= 1).should_not == e >= (0 >= 1)
(e > 0 > 1).should == (e > 0) > 1
(e > 0 > 1).should_not == e > (0 > 1)
end
it "<=> == === != =~ !~ are non-associative" do
lambda { eval("1 <=> 2 <=> 3") }.should raise_error(SyntaxError)
lambda { eval("1 == 2 == 3") }.should raise_error(SyntaxError)
lambda { eval("1 === 2 === 3") }.should raise_error(SyntaxError)
lambda { eval("1 != 2 != 3") }.should raise_error(SyntaxError)
lambda { eval("1 =~ 2 =~ 3") }.should raise_error(SyntaxError)
lambda { eval("1 !~ 2 !~ 3") }.should raise_error(SyntaxError)
end
it "<=> == === != =~ !~ have higher precedence than &&" do
(false && 2 <=> 3).should == false
(false && 3 == false).should == false
(false && 3 === false).should == false
(false && 3 != true).should == false
class FalseClass; def =~(o); o == false; end; end
(false && true =~ false).should == (false && (true =~ false))
(false && true =~ false).should_not == ((false && true) =~ false)
class FalseClass; undef_method :=~; end
(false && true !~ true).should == false
end
# XXX: figure out how to test it
# (a && b) && c equals to a && (b && c) for all a,b,c values I can imagine so far
it "&& is left-associative"
it "&& has higher precedence than ||" do
(true || false && false).should == true
end
# XXX: figure out how to test it
it "|| is left-associative"
it "|| has higher precedence than .. ..." do
(1..false||10).should == (1..10)
(1...false||10).should == (1...10)
end
it ".. ... are non-associative" do
lambda { eval("1..2..3") }.should raise_error(SyntaxError)
lambda { eval("1...2...3") }.should raise_error(SyntaxError)
end
it ".. ... have higher precedence than ? :" do
# Use variables to avoid warnings
from = 1
to = 2
# These are Range instances, not flip-flop
suppress_warning do
(eval("from..to") ? 3 : 4).should == 3
(eval("from...to") ? 3 : 4).should == 3
end
end
it "? : is right-associative" do
(true ? 2 : 3 ? 4 : 5).should == 2
end
def oops; raise end
it "? : has higher precedence than rescue" do
(true ? oops : 0 rescue 10).should == 10
end
# XXX: figure how to test it (problem similar to || associativity)
it "rescue is left-associative"
it "rescue has higher precedence than =" do
a = oops rescue 10
a.should == 10
# rescue doesn't have the same sense for %= /= and friends
end
it "= %= /= -= += |= &= >>= <<= *= &&= ||= **= are right-associative" do
a = b = 10
a.should == 10
b.should == 10
a = b = 10
a %= b %= 3
a.should == 0
b.should == 1
a = b = 10
a /= b /= 2
a.should == 2
b.should == 5
a = b = 10
a -= b -= 2
a.should == 2
b.should == 8
a = b = 10
a += b += 2
a.should == 22
b.should == 12
a,b = 32,64
a |= b |= 2
a.should == 98
b.should == 66
a,b = 25,13
a &= b &= 7
a.should == 1
b.should == 5
a,b=8,2
a >>= b >>= 1
a.should == 4
b.should == 1
a,b=8,2
a <<= b <<= 1
a.should == 128
b.should == 4
a,b=8,2
a *= b *= 2
a.should == 32
b.should == 4
a,b=10,20
a &&= b &&= false
a.should == false
b.should == false
a,b=nil,nil
a ||= b ||= 10
a.should == 10
b.should == 10
a,b=2,3
a **= b **= 2
a.should == 512
b.should == 9
end
it "= %= /= -= += |= &= >>= <<= *= &&= ||= **= have higher precedence than defined? operator" do
(defined? a = 10).should == "assignment"
(defined? a %= 10).should == "assignment"
(defined? a /= 10).should == "assignment"
(defined? a -= 10).should == "assignment"
(defined? a += 10).should == "assignment"
(defined? a |= 10).should == "assignment"
(defined? a &= 10).should == "assignment"
(defined? a >>= 10).should == "assignment"
(defined? a <<= 10).should == "assignment"
(defined? a *= 10).should == "assignment"
(defined? a &&= 10).should == "assignment"
(defined? a ||= 10).should == "assignment"
(defined? a **= 10).should == "assignment"
end
# XXX: figure out how to test it
it "defined? is non-associative"
it "defined? has higher precedence than not" do
# does it have sense?
(not defined? qqq).should == true
end
it "not is right-associative" do
(not not false).should == false
(not not 10).should == true
end
it "not has higher precedence than or/and" do
(not false and false).should == false
(not false or true).should == true
end
# XXX: figure out how to test it
it "or/and are left-associative"
it "or/and have higher precedence than if unless while until modifiers" do
(1 if 2 and 3).should == 1
(1 if 2 or 3).should == 1
(1 unless false and true).should == 1
(1 unless false or false).should == 1
(1 while true and false).should == nil # would hang upon error
(1 while false or false).should == nil
((raise until true and false) rescue 10).should == 10
(1 until false or true).should == nil # would hang upon error
end
# XXX: it seems to me they are right-associative
it "if unless while until are non-associative"
end
View git blame Copy permalink