Skip to content

Thoughts on TASTy grammar #27

@cache-nez

Description

@cache-nez

This is the list of my impressions from working with the TASTy grammar, which can hopefully be useful for an eventual discussion of TASTy. Additions are welcome.

  • It is hard to recover the type of a parent because of the surrounding Apply / Block, representing the call to the constructor
  • package is sometimes referenced in a special way: as THIS TYPEREFpkg <empty> rather than TERMREFpkg <empty>
  • if a MATCHtpt has a BIND(_) inside, the bound ident is represented as IDENT (rather than IDENTtpt) even though it represents a type
  • at the phase when TASTy is produced, we probably already know which of the parents SUPER refers to. However, this is not included in .tasty file. Perhaps this can be included to avoid re-resolution.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    discussionOpen ended discussion, not immediately actionable

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions