Fix and simplify grammar in SIP - 47 #53
Conversation
As noted in scala#47, the grammar did not correspond to the rest of the proposal, this PR solves that
Sporarum
changed the title
|
@julienrf What is the process for addendum PRs ? |
|
Sorry @Sporarum, I somehow missed your PR. I’ve just asked the original team of reviewers to review it. |
content/clause-interleaving.md
Outdated
| DefParamClauseChunk ::= [DefTypeParamClause] TermOrUsingParamClause {TermOrUsingParamClause} | ||
| TermOrUsingParamClause ::= DefTermParamClause | ||
| DefSig ::= id [DefParamClauses] [DefImplicitClause] -- and two DefTypeParamClause cannot be adjacent | ||
| DefParamClauses ::= DefParamClause { DefParamClause } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it would be clearer if the comment was on this line rather than the line above, but I'm really nitpicking here 😄
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see what you mean, I guess it mostly depends on how we want to use DefParamClauses in other places
I also assumed people would be looking for it first at the DefSig level, so it might be faster if the information is already here
Ultimately, I do not have a strong opinion either way, so maybe the other reviewers can comment on this ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree with @chrisandrews-ms. If @Kordyjan or @soronpo have a different opinion, please let us know!
Co-authored-by: Quentin Bernet <[email protected]>
3 participants
As noted in #47, the grammar did not correspond to the rest of the proposal, this PR solves that