Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

refactor(tree): clean code #757

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

aniaan
Copy link

@aniaan aniaan commented Oct 27, 2022

  1. make the node of ntParam have the correct prefix
  2. clean up the code and make it more readable

@pkieltyka
Copy link
Member

thanks for the PR -- for (1) does this fix any particular issues / cases you've identified?

@aniaan
Copy link
Author

aniaan commented Oct 27, 2022

thanks for the PR -- for (1) does this fix any particular issues / cases you've identified?

No, only the node related to ntRegexp uses the prefix field during the whole run, the node of ntParam does not use the prefix field, so whether the ntParam node has the correct prefix field or not does not affect the correctness of the program.
But in terms of the positioning of the prefix field, having the ntParam node have the correct prefix field will help to understand the code better.

The above issues are all some nuisances in reading the code, and if fixed, the readability of the code would be a little better.

@aniaan aniaan closed this Jun 21, 2023
# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants