prioritised TODO's

Author: seborama

object.go

@@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ func ObjectGetProperty(obj Object, name string) Value {
 		}
 	}
 
-	// TODO: we only support `struct` for now. Perhaps simple types (int, float, etc) are worthwhile an enhancement?
+	// TODO: we only support `struct` receivers for now. Perhaps simple types (int, float, etc) are worthwhile an enhancement?
 	if t.Kind() != reflect.Struct {
 		return NewUndefinedWithReasonf("object is '%s' but only 'struct' and '*struct' are currently supported", t.Kind())
 	}
@@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ func ObjectGetProperty(obj Object, name string) Value {
 				// allow support for (non-empty) interfaces
 				return ObjectValue{Object: fieldReflectValue.Interface()}
 			}
-		case reflect.Struct: // TODO: incomplete code: see ObjectGetProperty to handle `*struct` scenario.
+		case reflect.Struct: // TODO: (!!) incomplete code: see ObjectGetProperty to handle `*struct` scenario.
 			// allow support for struct types
 			return ObjectValue{Object: fieldReflectValue.Interface()}
 		}
@@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ func ObjectGetMethod(obj Object, name string) (FunctionalValue, bool) {
 					// allow support for (non-empty) interfaces
 					return ObjectValue{Object: out[0].Interface()}
 				}
-			case reflect.Struct: // TODO: incomplete code: see ObjectGetProperty to handle `*struct` scenario.
+			case reflect.Struct: // TODO: (!!) incomplete code: see ObjectGetProperty to handle `*struct` scenario.
 				// allow support for struct types
 				return ObjectValue{Object: out[0].Interface()}
 			}

tree.go

@@ -156,7 +156,7 @@ func (tree Tree) Calc(isOperatorInPrecedenceGroup func(Operator) bool, cfg *tree
 			}
 		}
 
-		// TODO: implement Calc() on all entry types (Value, Function, Variable, ObjectProperty, ObjectAccessor, etc.)
+		// TODO: (!!) implement Calc() on all entry types (Value, Function, Variable, ObjectProperty, ObjectAccessor, etc.)
 		// ...   and move the logic of each case below to the entry type itself.
 		switch e.kind() {
 		case valueEntryKind:

tree_builder_test.go

@@ -274,9 +274,10 @@ func TestTreeBuilder_FromExpr_Dot_Accessor_Property(t *testing.T) {
 	assert.Equal(t, gal.NewNumberFromFloat(100), gotVal)
 }
 
-// TODO: this is an idea for a future feature
+// TODO: (!) this is an idea for a future feature
 // func TestTreeBuilder_FromExpr_Arrays(t *testing.T) {
-//	expr := `f(1 2 3)[1]`
+//	expr := `f(1 2 3)[1]` // simple example
+//	expr := `f(1 2 3)[1 + sum(1 2 3)]` // complex example
 
 //	funcs := gal.Functions{
 //		"f": func(args ...gal.Value) gal.Value { return gal.NewMultiValue(args...) },
@@ -297,6 +298,11 @@ func TestTreeBuilder_FromExpr_Dot_Accessor_Property(t *testing.T) {
 //			gal.Tree{
 //				gal.NewNumberFromInt(3),
 //			},
+//			gal.Collection{ // this would work similarly to gal.Dot but with the lhs as the collection and the rhs as the index
+//				gal.Tree{
+//					gal.NewNumberFromInt(1),
+//				},
+//			},
 //		),
 //	}
 

tree_config.go

@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ type treeConfig struct {
 }
 
 // Variable returns the value of the variable specified by name.
-// TODO: add support for arrays and maps via `[...]`
+// TODO: (!) add support for arrays and maps via `[...]`
 // ...   NOTE: it may be more adequate to create a new `[]` operator.
 // ...   This would also permit its use on any Value, including those returned from function calls.
 // ...   We would likely need to create new types (unless MultiValue can work for this).