Bug-Fix for multi-keyword variable-list parsing for properties

[PBCOnGit]

If you try parsing a class containing a variable-list which has more then one keyword like below
class Test { public: int* test1, * test2, * test3; };
The parser will fail because it assumes a single "var-pair" only consists of the name and the seperator.
This approach will fail if tried on a case like above and will cause even more issues if extra modifiers like "const" are used.
The parsers also incorrectly assumes:
int * p1, p2;
boils down to:
int* p1; int* p2;
which is also incorrect since the Cpp-compiler will parse it to:
int* p1; int p2;
The commit tries to address these issues by modifying the component responsible for parsing variable-lists inside CppHeader::_evaluate_property_stack.
The commit also contains tests for the changes and doesn't cause any issues with the original tests.

[virtuald]

Thanks for the contribution! I'll take a look tonight, but looks like the tests are failing?

[PBCOnGit]

Thanks for the contribution! I'll take a look tonight, but looks like the tests are failing?

That is kinda weird to me considering I can run these tests on my machine with no problems.

[virtuald]

It seems like they're primarily failing on Python 2.7? My initial impression is this looks fine to me, but it doesn't properly handle types with templates in them (eg, Foo<X, Y, Z> x, y, *z;).

I have a local branch that I was working on earlier this week which is rewriting the way we parse function definitions to properly interpret things like std::function<void(int)> which will include code for consuming a template properly. I was hoping to work on it last night, but it looks like it'll be tonight or tomorrow night.

[virtuald]

I pushed my branch as PR #53 ... if you cherry-pick 286001c that will give you the function to properly consume templates.

[virtuald]

Taking a harder look at my problems tonight, I remembered the direction I wanted to go with parsing, so I'll be updating my function rework branch with those changes. I think it'll make the most sense to fold the function/property detection together, since it's ambiguous which you're dealing with until a ( or , is encountered (except as part of a template).

As part of that work, I'll fold in your unit tests but probably discard the rest.

[PBCOnGit]

Taking a harder look at my problems tonight, I remembered the direction I wanted to go with parsing, so I'll be updating my function rework branch with those changes. I think it'll make the most sense to fold the function/property detection together, since it's ambiguous which you're dealing with until a ( or , is encountered (except as part of a template).

As part of that work, I'll fold in your unit tests but probably discard the rest.

Alright, sounds like a good plan.
Thanks for the quick and active responses, even though I still find it weird that the tests are failing and can't reproduce it on my machine.

[virtuald]

... so I ended up rewriting the entire library?

As a result, cppheaderparser will be abandoned soon in favor of https://github.com/robotpy/cxxheaderparser (which doesn't have this bug and should be a lot more robust). Please check it out, would love any feedback. It's not a drop-in replacement, but it should be much more future proof.

I'm not inclined to spend time fixing this PR for Python 2.7, nor am I inclined to merge this until the tests pass. If you can make the tests pass I'm happy to merge this and push a final release to pypi.