I raised this point elsewhere and it was suggested I bring it here with a view to there being a change in the Chapel parser.
Some language treat a trailing comma in a list or tuple literal as not a problem. Many language, including currently Chapel, treat this as an error. For many this is a trivial non-issue. For some, people who construct tables of data for things like tests or application configuration, it becomes a real irritant. As with other language that have tuple literals Chapel requires a trailing comma in a tuple literal of one element: (1,) completely understandable, indeed required. However Chapel as many other language does not allow a trailing literal in any other situation: so (1, 2,) would be an error. This is a trivial point in many ways, but leads to huge irritations. If only this were allowed many hors of pain and anguish would be averted. Witness Python and other languages that allow the redundant trailing comma: [] [1], [1,] [1, 2], [1, 2,] () (1,) (1, 2), (1, 2,) are all legal in language allowing trailing redundant comma. In languages that do not allow this, literal data manipulation become a right royal pain in the proverbials. Personally I see no reason at all for not allowing this element of redundancy. I believe the Chapel grammar should be amended to allow this. -- Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:[email protected] 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: [email protected] London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Chapel-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/chapel-users
