Split parser into multiple files

[koushiro]

Signed-off-by: koushiro [email protected]

I found that the parser module is only in one large file, which is not very friendly for viewing the code and resolving git conflicts, so I split it by the way when I view the code, but I don’t know if this big PR can be accepted (without changing the parser logic)

visibility changes:

• pub fn parse_identifiers ==> fn parse_identifiers
• fn parse_prepare ==> pub fn parse_prepare
• fn parse_execute ==> pub fn parse_execute
• fn parse_deallocate ==> pub fn parse_deallocate

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 1196621825

Warning: This coverage report may be inaccurate.

This pull request's base commit is no longer the HEAD commit of its target branch. This means it includes changes from outside the original pull request, including, potentially, unrelated coverage changes.

• For more information on this, see Tracking coverage changes with pull request builds.
• To avoid this issue with future PRs, see these Recommended CI Configurations.
• For a quick fix, rebase this PR at GitHub. Your next report should be accurate.

Details

• 1404 of 1622 (86.56%) changed or added relevant lines in 5 files are covered.
• No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
• Overall coverage remained the same at 90.07%

---

Changes Missing Coverage	Covered Lines	Changed/Added Lines	%
src/parser/tcl.rs	30	31	96.77%
src/parser/dml.rs	21	25	84.0%
src/parser/dql.rs	306	331	92.45%
src/parser/ddl.rs	293	365	80.27%
src/parser/mod.rs	754	870	86.67%

Totals
Change from base Build 1193231211:	0.0%
Covered Lines:	5687
Relevant Lines:	6314

---

💛 - Coveralls

[koushiro]

The commit Differentiate methods caused a lot of git diff content, but in fact it only adjusted the order of the methods.

If this is unacceptable, I will revert the commit.

[koushiro]

/cc @alamb @Dandandan what do you think?

[alamb]

Thank you for the contribution @koushiro

I am not opposed to this change, but I am not sure if the additional value is worth the potential risk to breaking downstream consumers. I will let others weigh in as well

[koushiro]

I dropped the commit Differentiate methods in #351 to make it easier to be reviewed.

/cc @alamb @Dandandan Is there any progress?

[alamb]

/cc @alamb @Dandandan Is there any progress?

I am of two minds here -- I like that you are trying to improve the codebase, but I am worried about doing a substantial reorganization that offers contributors to the library some benefit but imposes costs on users of the library.

[koushiro]

I am of two minds here -- I like that you are trying to improve the codebase, but I am worried about doing a substantial reorganization that offers contributors to the library some benefit but imposes costs on users of the library.

At least this PR has no other breaking changes except for the visibility changes of some functions. I think this won't impose costs on the users of the library.