Skip to content
New issue

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

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

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Add completion for loop labels after Break/Continue #16438

Merged
merged 7 commits into from Feb 1, 2022
Merged

Add completion for loop labels after Break/Continue #16438

merged 7 commits into from Feb 1, 2022

Conversation

MartinGC94
Copy link
Contributor

@MartinGC94 MartinGC94 commented Nov 10, 2021

PR Summary

Adds completion for loop labels after labeled control flow statements such as Break and Continue.
The completion will look for any loops with a label that surrounds the Break/Continue keywords.
The tooltips for the completion entries shows the relevant loop.

PR Context

Tab completion is always convenient because it helps prevents typos. It also helps prevent a relatively common mistake of including a colon in the label after Break/Continue.

PR Checklist

@MartinGC94 @iSazonov
Update src/System.Management.Automation/engine/CommandCompletion/Comp…
5f31919 
…letionAnalysis.cs

Co-authored-by: Ilya <darpa@yandex.ru>
@msftbot
Copy link

@msftbot msftbot bot commented Nov 19, 2021

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

@adityapatwardhan adityapatwardhan requested a review from daxian-dbw Jan 3, 2022
@adityapatwardhan
Copy link
Member

@adityapatwardhan adityapatwardhan commented Jan 3, 2022

Adding @daxian-dbw as area expert.

@msftbot msftbot bot removed the Review - Needed label Jan 3, 2022
@MartinGC94 @iSazonov
Apply suggestions from code review
1681154 
Co-authored-by: Ilya <darpa@yandex.ru>
@iSazonov
Copy link
Collaborator

@iSazonov iSazonov commented Jan 5, 2022 •
edited

Can follow work (without closing brackets)?
:Outer do {:Inner while ($true){ break } continue ^

@MartinGC94
Copy link
Contributor Author

@MartinGC94 MartinGC94 commented Jan 5, 2022

Can follow work (without closing brackets)? :Outer do {:Inner while ($true){ break } continue ^

Now it does :)
I doubt most people will notice though. If you are using loop labels you are almost certainly editing in an editor and using snippets to create the loops.

@msftbot
Copy link

@msftbot msftbot bot commented Jan 13, 2022

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

@pull-request-quantifier
Copy link

@pull-request-quantifier pull-request-quantifier bot commented Jan 18, 2022

This PR has 68 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

Quantification details 

Label      : Small
Size       : +68 -0
Percentile : 27.2%

Total files changed: 2

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +22 -0
.ps1 : +46 -0

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detetcted.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

Was this comment helpful? 👍  👌  👎 (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

@msftbot
Copy link

@msftbot msftbot bot commented Jan 26, 2022

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

@daxian-dbw
Copy link
Member

@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw commented Jan 26, 2022

@adityapatwardhan This PR is ready to be merged.

@iSazonov iSazonov assigned iSazonov and unassigned adityapatwardhan Feb 1, 2022
@iSazonov iSazonov merged commit 7d3260f into PowerShell:master Feb 1, 2022
46 checks passed
@iSazonov
Copy link
Collaborator

@iSazonov iSazonov commented Feb 1, 2022

@MartinGC94 Thanks for your contribution!

@MartinGC94 MartinGC94 deleted the LoopLabelCompletion branch Feb 1, 2022
@msftbot
Copy link

@msftbot msftbot bot commented Feb 24, 2022

🎉v7.3.0-preview.2 has been released which incorporates this pull request.🎉

Handy links:

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@iSazonov iSazonov

@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw

Assignees

@iSazonov iSazonov

Labels
CL-General Small
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
4 participants
@MartinGC94 @adityapatwardhan @iSazonov @daxian-dbw