[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-5627?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jens Geyer updated THRIFT-5627:
-------------------------------
Description:
As a side effect on my current work I recognized an interesting parser warning.
Essentially it boils down to the list<> case in these definitions taken from
https://thrift.apache.org/docs/idl which (now) would cause ambiguities.
{code}
[28] MapType ::= 'map' CppType? '<' FieldType ',' FieldType '>'
[29] SetType ::= 'set' CppType? '<' FieldType '>'
[30] ListType ::= 'list' '<' FieldType '>' CppType?
{code}
I wonder why we need it this way at all. Wouldn't it be better if list<> set<>
and map<> would expect the same syntax?
was:
As a side effect on my current work I recognized a warning that was there
before:
Essentially it boils down to the list<> case in these definitions taken from
https://thrift.apache.org/docs/idl which causes ambiguities.
{code}
[28] MapType ::= 'map' CppType? '<' FieldType ',' FieldType '>'
[29] SetType ::= 'set' CppType? '<' FieldType '>'
[30] ListType ::= 'list' '<' FieldType '>' CppType?
{code}
I wonder why we need it this way at all. Wouldn't it be better if list<> set<>
and map<> would expect the same syntax?
> More consistent syntax for cpp_type
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: THRIFT-5627
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-5627
> Project: Thrift
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Compiler (General)
> Reporter: Jens Geyer
> Assignee: Jens Geyer
> Priority: Major
>
> As a side effect on my current work I recognized an interesting parser
> warning.
> Essentially it boils down to the list<> case in these definitions taken from
> https://thrift.apache.org/docs/idl which (now) would cause ambiguities.
> {code}
> [28] MapType ::= 'map' CppType? '<' FieldType ',' FieldType '>'
> [29] SetType ::= 'set' CppType? '<' FieldType '>'
> [30] ListType ::= 'list' '<' FieldType '>' CppType?
> {code}
> I wonder why we need it this way at all. Wouldn't it be better if list<>
> set<> and map<> would expect the same syntax?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
