cex: don't display twice unifying examples if there is no color

It makes no sense, and is actually confusing, to display twice the
same example with no visible difference.

* src/complain.h, src/complain.c (is_styled): New.
* src/counterexample.c (print_counterexample): Display the unified
example a second time only if it makes a difference.
* tests/conflicts.at, tests/counterexample.at, tests/report.at: Adjust.
* tests/diagnostics.at: Make sure we do display the unifying examples
twice when colors are enabled.  And check those colors.
This commit is contained in:
Akim Demaille
2020-06-19 07:06:24 +02:00
parent 69e3b405d9
commit 0f120354b6
7 changed files with 78 additions and 34 deletions

View File

@@ -49,15 +49,24 @@ if $EGREP ['\^M|\\[0-9][0-9][0-9]'] input.y experr >/dev/null; then
AT_PERL_REQUIRE([-pi -e 's{\^M}{\r}g;s{\\(\d{3}|.)}{$v = $[]1; $v =~ /\A\d+\z/ ? chr($v) : $v}ge' input.y experr])
fi
AT_CHECK([LC_ALL="$locale" $5 bison -fcaret --color=debug -Wall input.y], [$3], [], [experr])
AT_CHECK([LC_ALL="$locale" $5 bison -fcaret --color=debug -Wall,cex input.y], [$3], [], [experr])
# When no style, same messages, but without style.
AT_PERL_REQUIRE([-pi -e 's{(</?(-|\w)+>)}{ $[]1 eq "<tag>" ? $[]1 : "" }ge' experr])
# Except for the second display of the counterexample,
# which is not displayed at all.
AT_PERL_REQUIRE([-pi -e '
s{(</?(-|\w)+>)}{ $[]1 eq "<tag>" ? $[]1 : "" }ge;
if (/Example/)
{
++$example;
$_ = "" if $example % 2 == 0;
}
' experr])
# Cannot use AT_BISON_CHECK easily as we need to change the
# environment.
# FIXME: Enhance AT_BISON_CHECK.
AT_CHECK([LC_ALL="$locale" $5 bison -fcaret -Wall input.y], [$3], [], [experr])
AT_CHECK([LC_ALL="$locale" $5 bison -fcaret -Wall,cex input.y], [$3], [], [experr])
AT_BISON_OPTION_POPDEFS
@@ -509,6 +518,41 @@ input.y:11.6-9: <error>error:</error> symbol 'QUUX' is used, but is not defined
11 | bar: <error>QUUX</error>
| <error>^~~~</error>
]])
## ----------------- ##
## Counterexamples. ##
## ----------------- ##
AT_TEST([[Counterexamples]],
[[%expect 0
%%
exp
: "if" exp "then" exp
| "if" exp "then" exp "else" exp
| exp "+" exp
| "num"
]],
[1],
[[input.y: <error>error:</error> shift/reduce conflicts: 4 found, 0 expected
Shift/reduce conflict on token "+":
Example <cex-0><cex-1><cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"+"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-dot>•</cex-dot></cex-1> <cex-leaf>"+"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf></cex-0>
First derivation <cex-0><cex-step>exp ::=[ </cex-step><cex-1><cex-step>exp ::=[ </cex-step><cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"+"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-dot>•</cex-dot><cex-step> ]</cex-step></cex-1> <cex-leaf>"+"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf><cex-step> ]</cex-step></cex-0>
Example <cex-0><cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"+"</cex-leaf><cex-1> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-dot>•</cex-dot> <cex-leaf>"+"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf></cex-1></cex-0>
Second derivation <cex-0><cex-step>exp ::=[ </cex-step><cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"+"</cex-leaf><cex-1> <cex-step>exp ::=[ </cex-step><cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-dot>•</cex-dot> <cex-leaf>"+"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf><cex-step> ]</cex-step></cex-1><cex-step> ]</cex-step></cex-0>
Shift/reduce conflict on token "else":
Example <cex-0><cex-leaf>"if"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"then"</cex-leaf><cex-1> <cex-leaf>"if"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"then"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-dot>•</cex-dot></cex-1> <cex-leaf>"else"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf></cex-0>
First derivation <cex-0><cex-step>exp ::=[ </cex-step><cex-leaf>"if"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"then"</cex-leaf><cex-1> <cex-step>exp ::=[ </cex-step><cex-leaf>"if"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"then"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-dot>•</cex-dot><cex-step> ]</cex-step></cex-1> <cex-leaf>"else"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf><cex-step> ]</cex-step></cex-0>
Example <cex-0><cex-leaf>"if"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"then"</cex-leaf><cex-1> <cex-leaf>"if"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"then"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-dot>•</cex-dot> <cex-leaf>"else"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf></cex-1></cex-0>
Second derivation <cex-0><cex-step>exp ::=[ </cex-step><cex-leaf>"if"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"then"</cex-leaf><cex-1> <cex-step>exp ::=[ </cex-step><cex-leaf>"if"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"then"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-dot>•</cex-dot> <cex-leaf>"else"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf><cex-step> ]</cex-step></cex-1><cex-step> ]</cex-step></cex-0>
Shift/reduce conflict on token "+":
Example <cex-0><cex-1><cex-leaf>"if"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"then"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"else"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-dot>•</cex-dot></cex-1> <cex-leaf>"+"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf></cex-0>
First derivation <cex-0><cex-step>exp ::=[ </cex-step><cex-1><cex-step>exp ::=[ </cex-step><cex-leaf>"if"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"then"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"else"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-dot>•</cex-dot><cex-step> ]</cex-step></cex-1> <cex-leaf>"+"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf><cex-step> ]</cex-step></cex-0>
Example <cex-0><cex-leaf>"if"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"then"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"else"</cex-leaf><cex-1> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-dot>•</cex-dot> <cex-leaf>"+"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf></cex-1></cex-0>
Second derivation <cex-0><cex-step>exp ::=[ </cex-step><cex-leaf>"if"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"then"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>"else"</cex-leaf><cex-1> <cex-step>exp ::=[ </cex-step><cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf> <cex-dot>•</cex-dot> <cex-leaf>"+"</cex-leaf> <cex-leaf>exp</cex-leaf><cex-step> ]</cex-step></cex-1><cex-step> ]</cex-step></cex-0>
]])