Fix: unwrap multi-return values in PropertyAccess and method calls#1895
Merged
zefhemel merged 1 commit intosilverbulletmd:mainfrom Mar 18, 2026
Merged
Conversation
Collaborator
|
Nice catch |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
evalPrefixExpression can return a LuaMultiRes (e.g. string.gsub returns (result, count)).
The TableAccess case already called singleResult() to unwrap this, but PropertyAccess and the method-call path in FunctionCall did not — causing "attempt to index a userdata value" when chaining on multi-return results.
This adds the missing singleResult() calls to match Lua's adjustment rules for single-value contexts.
I discovered this when adding support for https://fennel-lang.org . The fennel compiler, written in Lua, mostly works in your lua implementation, except for this issue (and Lezer doesn't handle parsing the fennel compiler source very well but that's out of scope of this PR)