Thanks Eliot, 2016-07-26 21:24 GMT+02:00 Eliot Miranda <[email protected]>:
> Hi Nicolai, > > On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Nicolai Hess <[email protected]> > 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 >
