-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 37
New issue
Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? # to your account
Higher-order rules. #32
Comments
Possible syntax option:
Need to figure out type constraints. |
This must be legal:
(using the above syntax) Also, it must be equivalent to This must be legal:
Also, there must not be any syntactic ambiguities, nor any restriction on depth or breadth of rule relationships. |
since |
Some possible syntax options:
Really, any left-right Unicode characters would work, but we need to only use what can be typed on a keyboard. Of the above options, I like No.1 the best, since higher-order rules are very similar to and will work closely with C#'s generic type system. |
The syntax will need to be able to express these:
|
Rule Syntax take 2:
Also, the parens can be elided for a rule name:
|
I think I will move forward with this simple syntax, and see where it falls down. Of course, sometimes you need to pass in a type and sometimes you need to pass in a rule. We'll probably have to hash out a more complex syntax for dealing with both of these cases. |
Come up with a syntax for higher-order rules.
They will most likely be implemented as delegate passing and generics in C#.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: