Conform Semver and Range to fmt::Display

[mxcl]

I imagine this is horrendous and maybe even dangerous.

It also isn’t quite how libpkgx behaves since we keep a “pretty” string around for rendering purposes but let’s find out if we need that later.

[mxcl]

Also you may want to put the code in different files? I tried, but cargo complained.

[mxcl]

Also I'm assuming you want these, but you don’t have to.

[jhheider]

i want this a lot. i just need to add tests so coveralls doesn't make me look bad.

[mxcl]

Since we're rendering @ here perhaps we should properly support @ in Range::parse too? I can add that in a separate PR.

[jhheider]

ok, I think I solved it. @ is =:

import SemVer, { Range } from "./src/utils/semver.ts";

const a = new SemVer("1.2.3")!;
const b = new SemVer("1.2.4")!;
const r = new Range([[a, b]]);

console.log("a:", a);
console.log("b:", b);
console.log("r:", r);

[1.2, 1.3] isn't @1.2, but [1.2.2.2, 1.2.2.3] is @1.2.2.2..... sooooo, ok.

[jhheider]

@mxcl: please confirm this conforms to your understanding of @:

#[test]
fn test_at() -> Result<()> {
    let ra = Range::parse(">=1.0<1.1")?;

    assert_eq!(format!("{ra}"), "~1");

    let rb = Range::parse("=1.1")?;

    assert_eq!(format!("{rb}"), "=1.1");

    let rc = Range::parse(">=1.1.0<1.1.1")?;

    assert_eq!(format!("{rc}"), "@1.1.0");

    let rd = Range::parse("=1.1.1")?;

    assert_eq!(format!("{rd}"), "=1.1.1");

    let re = Range::parse(">=1.1.1.0<1.1.1.1")?;

    assert_eq!(format!("{re}"), "@1.1.1.0");

    let rf = Range::parse("=1.1.1.0")?;

    assert_eq!(format!("{rf}"), "=1.1.1.0");

    let rg = Range::parse(">=1.1<1.1.1.1.1")?;

    assert_eq!(format!("{rg}"), ">=1.1<1.1.1.1.1");

    let rh = Range::parse(">=1.1.1<1.1.3")?;

    assert_eq!(format!("{rh}"), ">=1.1.1<1.1.3");

    let ri = Range::parse(">=1.1.1<1.2.2")?;

    assert_eq!(format!("{ri}"), ">=1.1.1<1.2.2");

    Ok(())
}

[jhheider]

Since we're rendering @ here perhaps we should properly support @ in Range::parse too? I can add that in a separate PR.

went ahead here: 454ad14

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 12613833404

Details

• 60 of 60 (100.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 3 files are covered.
• No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
• Overall coverage increased (+2.1%) to 99.355%

---

Totals
Change from base Build 12613825016:	2.1%
Covered Lines:	308
Relevant Lines:	310

---

💛 - Coveralls

[mxcl]

Yes this is correct IMO. Thank you!