Dedup method comments

[soutaro]

Fixes #1054

[ioquatix]

Do you know why duplicates existed in the first place?

[soutaro]

I don't think there was a good reason to have it duplicated. It should be just because of a confusion caused by the complicated structure and bad names... 😓

A def declaration with several overloads has duplicated documentations given to the def declaration.

# Doc is for def syntax
def foo: () -> String                  (Overload 1)
       | (Integer) -> Integer          (Overload 2)

# Another doc for another def syntax
def foo: (Integer, Integer) -> void    (Overload 3)
       | ...

And the defs attribute contains the overloads, 1, 2, and 3, not def syntaxes.

This caused the duplication.

[ioquatix]

Would it make sense to have a single source of truth for unique documentation?

In your example case, it seems reasonable that there are 2 distinct "documentation" instances.

[soutaro]

Not very sure what do you mean with a single source of truth. The RBS::AST::***#comment would be the source of truth, and this #comments method is a utility to help collect every comments attached to a method.

In the example above, there will be two comments, for #foo method.

• RBS::AST::Members::MethodDefinition object for the first def has the first doc
  • The second object has the second doc
  • This is the source of truth
• The comments will be distributed to method overloads, so that we can provide hover feature to show the documents from the source code
  • Overload 1 and 2 have the first doc
  • Overload 3 has the second doc
• The #comments method collects the docs through overloads
  • This is the reason of duplication: There are three overloads and we got three comments
  • Deduping the comments will result in two comment object: the first doc and second doc

[ioquatix]

I'll try it out and see how it works in practice. Thanks for your help.