Spaces after tabs should be allowed for implicit as well as explicit line continuation.

[nevdelap]

Space after tabs is not allowed in implicit line continuation and so currently requires the workaround of using explicit line continuation for vertical alignment where it needn't be.

Test case: (Note: code doesn't display as intended here. Ok copied to editor with tabs=4)

class X

	def foo(i as int, j as int) as int
		return i + j

	def main
		trace .foo(1, 2)
		trace .foo(1,
				2)
		trace .foo(1,
				   2)

test.cobra(11): error: test.cobra(11,1): error: Cannot mix tabs and
spaces in indentation. [TAB][TAB][TAB][TAB][SPACE][SPACE][SPACE]...

[hopscc]

see also ticket:112 and ticket:116

[hopscc]

Fix for line contin whitespace - treat same as explicit contin char in tokeniser but use a slightly different table than the Parser one.

Still allows back indent - perhaps we shouldnt but theres a largish number of tests that do this.

New test file and uncomment existing tests for indent that use both tabs and spaces.

Ticket:116 is closed. Think this should address whats left of ticket:112 also so it can be closed when this one is as well.

[Charles]

In the patch, CobraTokenizer's list of continuation ops is duplicated from the parser with 3 changes:

• Added COMMA
• Removed GT and DOUBLE_GT

I presume the parser doesn't need the COMMA because that situation is handled elsewhere.

What is the implication of not having GT and DOUBLE_GT in the tokenizer's list? That something like < or + will work, but > will not?

Btw you don't have to repeat the class name for shared members:

# in CobraParser:
if .peek.which == 'EOL' and opToken.which in CobraParser.implicitContinuationOps 
# can be:
if .peek.which == 'EOL' and opToken.which in .implicitContinuationOps 

# in CobraTokenizer:
_implicitLineContinuation = .lastToken and .lastToken.which in CobraTokenizer.implicitContinuationOps
# can be:
_implicitLineContinuation = .lastToken and .lastToken.which in .implicitContinuationOps

Note to self: workspace-v

[hopscc]

Yah - think thats the case - Parser handles comma elsewhere, lexer check needs it explicitly ( like for continued/multiline method calls).

Right, Needed to drop GT and DOUBLE_GT from lexer list cos it gets seriously confounded with generic decls. I figured the loss of accepting lines ending in a GT-than comparison was an acceptable tradeoff for the moment.

I realise the class name on static is unnecessary but I try to write static method access via an explicit classname as an indicator/reminder that its a shared method access rather than an instance.