Run Resyntax on various files #433
Conversation
Fixed 9 issues in 4 files. * Fixed 6 occurences of `let-to-define` * Fixed 2 occurences of `arrow-contract-with-rest-to-arrow-contract-with-ellipses` * Fixed 1 occurence of `nested-for-to-for*`
Fixed 1 issues in 1 files. * Fixed 1 occurence of `if-begin-to-cond`
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Resyntax analyzed 4 files in this pull request and found no issues.
| (cond | ||
| [(or (eof-object? c) (char=? c #\newline)) null] | ||
| [(char=? c #\@) (cons (recur) (loop))] | ||
| [else (cons (string c) (loop))]))))))) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
FWIW, this is a rare place where I find the refomatting suboptimal. I often prefer to write cond "questions" and "answers" on separate lines so that I can see all the possible answers more clearly. I don't object enough to stand in the way of the overall improvements, though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree w/ Matthew here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
cc @sorawee, since this is a fmt choice.
In this case I disagree, since everything is so short. But I can understand the reasoning.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you also prefer that the else and its accompanying expression be on opposite lines? The cond expression on line 23 above has the regular branch split across lines, but the else clause is a single line.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Generally, yes. I often go back and forth on this while editing code, and usually end up happiest after I've added newlines consistently, but probably not always.
Similar to #432, this pull request runs Resyntax on various files. Each commit is a single pass from Resyntax, and the commit message lists the refactoring rules that were applied.