Fix parser issue on type annotations in e.g. empty list type annotations #36
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #1, and I don't think it breaks anything else. That turned out to be extremely easy.
I was following the spec in my initial implementation, and I think there might be a bug there. For example:
And similarly
toMapandmergehaveapplication-expressionfor their type annotations, but e.g. dhall-haskell is perfectly happy to parse[]: List Natural: Type, where the type annotation doesn't matchapplication-expression. If I'm reading the ABNF correctly and what dhall-haskell is doing doesn't match it, it seems to me like dhall-haskell is doing the right thing, and I think we should follow it here (I could just be confusing myself, though).The change in this PR just replaces my JavaCC equivalents of
application-expressionwithexpressionin the grammar, and it makes the parser match dhall-haskell (apparently) without breaking anything else.