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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Fix parameter completion for invalid scripts #17687

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Fix parameter completion for invalid scripts #17687

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

MartinGC94
Copy link
Contributor

@MartinGC94 MartinGC94 commented Jul 14, 2022 •
edited

PR Summary

Fixes #4549
Fixes #12079
Fixes #11422

Allows tab completion for parameters to continue working when script requirements like #requires -RunAsAdministrator fail due to the current session not meeting the script requirements.
Also allows tab completion to work for commands with parameters that use types that haven't been loaded yet, in such cases the type will be displayed as if the type hadn't been specified.

PR Context

PR Checklist

@pull-request-quantifier-deprecated
Copy link

This PR has 36 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

Quantification details 

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +31 -5
Percentile : 14.4%

Total files changed: 5

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +14 -5
.ps1 : +17 -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? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

@ghost ghost assigned PaulHigin Jul 14, 2022
@MartinGC94
Copy link
Contributor Author

Looking at the test failures, I guess we can't just ignore those errors in every scenario. I assumed I could because Experimental and hidden param attributes are ignored.
One solution could be to only ignore errors for type constraints but that won't help scenarios where scripts are using an attribute that hasn't been loaded yet.
Are there any other solutions?

@iSazonov iSazonov added the WG-Interactive-IntelliSense tab completion label Jul 15, 2022
@iSazonov
Copy link
Collaborator

WG discussion tag.

On the one hand it makes sense to have more freedom with #requires -RunAsAdministrator or hidden scenarios for example, but on the other hand I don't see the point of doing this for types that are not loaded.

@ghost ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Jul 22, 2022
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jul 22, 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

iSazonov
iSazonov reviewed Dec 20, 2022
View reviewed changes
src/System.Management.Automation/engine/parser/Compiler.cs
}
catch (RuntimeException)
{
continue;
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Since it is Compiler can this change a behavior of real script execution?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't know. We need someone that is more familiar with the engine to answer that question.

@daxian-dbw
Copy link
Member

@MartinGC94 Sorry for taking so long to review. Can you please resolve the conflicts for this PR?

@ghost ghost removed the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Apr 25, 2023
@ghost ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label May 3, 2023
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented May 3, 2023

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

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

@iSazonov iSazonov iSazonov left review comments

@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw Awaiting requested review from daxian-dbw daxian-dbw is a code owner

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees

@PaulHigin PaulHigin

Labels
Extra Small Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed WG-Interactive-IntelliSense tab completion
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
4 participants
@MartinGC94 @iSazonov @daxian-dbw @PaulHigin