You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Original bug ID: 7216 Reporter: @sliquister Assigned to:@garrigue Status: resolved (set by @garrigue on 2016-12-13T08:25:19Z) Resolution: fixed Priority: normal Severity: minor Version: 4.02.3 Target version: 4.03.1+dev Fixed in version: 4.05.0 +dev/beta1/beta2/beta3/rc1 Category: ~DO NOT USE (was: OCaml general) Monitored by:@diml@hcarty
This is originally designed to avoid any syntactic conflict between the core and module levels.
I see at least two way it could be improved:
By allowing to omit the parenthesis where there is no (potential) ambiguity, i.e. everywhere except functor positions.
In theory it's ok, but one would have to fix the conflicts by hand. Painful.
Just remove the need for double parentheses.
I.e. create a paren_module_expr non-terminal, which can be used directly as argument to a functor.
The second option is much simpler. I include a patch that seems to work.
I ran into this issue of having to write double parens again. Any chance this patch can be merged? The patch looks good to me (the error case that's removed is now covered by an error case that was there for parenthesized module expr, if someone is curious), and it works as intended.
Original bug ID: 7216
Reporter: @sliquister
Assigned to: @garrigue
Status: resolved (set by @garrigue on 2016-12-13T08:25:19Z)
Resolution: fixed
Priority: normal
Severity: minor
Version: 4.02.3
Target version: 4.03.1+dev
Fixed in version: 4.05.0 +dev/beta1/beta2/beta3/rc1
Category: ~DO NOT USE (was: OCaml general)
Monitored by: @diml @hcarty
Bug description
include A(val x);;
Error: Syntax error
include A((val x));;
Error: Unbound value x
File attachments
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: