Smalltalk › Pharo › Pharo Smalltalk Developers

pragma syntax

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

5 messages Options

Nicolai Hess-3-2

pragma syntax

Hi,

is this valid pragma syntax:

foo
<func: #operation arg: #+>
^ self

(note the closing angle and the +-symbol)

The above code is what the pretty printer creates if you pretty-print this code

foo
<func: #operation arg: #+ >
^ self

(note the space between #+ and >

Or a bug in the parser ?

this pragma definition
<func: #operation arg: #a>

seems to work.

Eliot Miranda-2

Re: pragma syntax

Hi Nicolai,

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi,

is this valid pragma syntax:

foo
<func: #operation arg: #+>
^ self

You could say it was ambiguous. With the change to the syntax of binary selectors in recent years #+> is a binary selector, and so you need whitespace after the token to separate it from the closing >.

(note the closing angle and the +-symbol)

The above code is what the pretty printer creates if you pretty-print this code

IMO, the pretty printer is the thing that needs fixing. If the last token in the pragma is a binary selector symbol literal then a space should be printed.

foo
    <func: #operation arg: #+ >
    ^ self

(note the space between #+ and >

Or a bug in the parser ?

this pragma definition
    <func: #operation arg: #a>
seems to work.

_,,,^..^,,,_

best, Eliot

Nicolai Hess-3-2

Re: pragma syntax

Thanks Eliot,

2016-07-26 21:24 GMT+02:00 Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]>:

Hi Nicolai,

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

is this valid pragma syntax:

foo
<func: #operation arg: #+>
^ self

You could say it was ambiguous. With the change to the syntax of binary selectors in recent years #+> is a binary selector, and so you need whitespace after the token to separate it from the closing >.

I was a bit supprised, why '+>' would be a binary selector, as for example greater-or-equal is ">=" and not "=>". But I like that we can define (any?) combination as binary selector and create new ones like
=>
==>

or
-->

(note the closing angle and the +-symbol)

The above code is what the pretty printer creates if you pretty-print this code

IMO, the pretty printer is the thing that needs fixing. If the last token in the pragma is a binary selector symbol literal then a space should be printed.

:( yes, but I don't like that we need to insert spaces.

foo
    <func: #operation arg: #+ >
    ^ self

(note the space between #+ and >

Or a bug in the parser ?

this pragma definition
    <func: #operation arg: #a>
seems to work.

_,,,^..^,,,_
best, Eliot

Peter Uhnak

Re: pragma syntax

So binary selector can be any non-alphanumeric symbol?

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 9:35 PM, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote:

Thanks Eliot,

2016-07-26 21:24 GMT+02:00 Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]>:
Hi Nicolai,

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

is this valid pragma syntax:

foo
    <func: #operation arg: #+>
    ^ self

You could say it was ambiguous. With the change to the syntax of binary selectors in recent years #+> is a binary selector, and so you need whitespace after the token to separate it from the closing >.

I was a bit supprised, why '+>' would be a binary selector, as for example greater-or-equal is ">=" and not "=>". But I like that we can define (any?) combination as binary selector and create new ones like
=>
==>
or
-->

(note the closing angle and the +-symbol)

The above code is what the pretty printer creates if you pretty-print this code

IMO, the pretty printer is the thing that needs fixing. If the last token in the pragma is a binary selector symbol literal then a space should be printed.

:( yes, but I don't like that we need to insert spaces.

foo
    <func: #operation arg: #+ >
    ^ self

(note the space between #+ and >

Or a bug in the parser ?

this pragma definition
    <func: #operation arg: #a>
seems to work.

_,,,^..^,,,_
best, Eliot

cbc

Re: pragma syntax

I would hope there are exceptions - at least $. and $; .

Otherwise mass chaos would ensue.

Search for the method #initializeTypeTable. That should steer you towards what can be in a binary method (everything not specifically called out as something besides #xBinary).

-cbc

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:

So binary selector can be any non-alphanumeric symbol?

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 9:35 PM, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote:
Thanks Eliot,

2016-07-26 21:24 GMT+02:00 Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]>:
Hi Nicolai,

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

is this valid pragma syntax:

foo
    <func: #operation arg: #+>
    ^ self

You could say it was ambiguous. With the change to the syntax of binary selectors in recent years #+> is a binary selector, and so you need whitespace after the token to separate it from the closing >.

I was a bit supprised, why '+>' would be a binary selector, as for example greater-or-equal is ">=" and not "=>". But I like that we can define (any?) combination as binary selector and create new ones like
=>
==>
or
-->

(note the closing angle and the +-symbol)

The above code is what the pretty printer creates if you pretty-print this code

IMO, the pretty printer is the thing that needs fixing. If the last token in the pragma is a binary selector symbol literal then a space should be printed.

:( yes, but I don't like that we need to insert spaces.

foo
    <func: #operation arg: #+ >
    ^ self

(note the space between #+ and >

Or a bug in the parser ?

this pragma definition
    <func: #operation arg: #a>
seems to work.

_,,,^..^,,,_
best, Eliot