I'm trying to write a sweet.js macro which needs to generate method call syntax, obj.method(), but the method is passed in to the macro as a literal expression. For example:
mcall(obj, toString().length);
// becomes
obj.toString().length;
I've got something that's close:
macro mcall {
rule { ($o, $m:expr) } => { $o.$m }
}
mcall(obj, toString().length);
However, this apparently expands to this:
obj . ( toString ( ) . length );
Where are these extra parentheses coming from, and how do I get rid of them? Should I be using case rules and #{}? I tried permutations of that but still couldn't succeed at generating a method call without extra parentheses.
So currently in sweet.js tokens bound to an
:exprpattern variable get wrapped in parens to help with getting precedence to work correctly. This is kind of a hack and will get fixed soon (some more discussion here: https://github.com/mozilla/sweet.js/issues/314).The simple solution for your example is to just not use
:exprsince you don't really need it:Side note: using
:expris technically wrong here since the RHS of a.is not allowed to be an unrestricted expression (eg2+4matches$m:exprbutobj.2+4is a syntax error).