[rust-dev] bikeshed on closure syntax

Patrick Walton pwalton at mozilla.com
Tue Apr 17 22:06:46 PDT 2012

On 04/17/2012 10:03 PM, David Piepgrass wrote:
>      > This requires arbitrary lookahead to disambiguate from tuples.
>     This bit in particular. Really really don't want to cross the bridge to
>     arbitrary lookahead in the grammar.
> Pardon me, but I'm not convinced that there is a problem in lambdas
> like (x, y) -> (x + y). By analogy, you can realize that ((x * y) + z,
> q) is a tuple instead of a simple parenthesized expression when you
> reach the comma -- you don't need to look ahead for a comma in advance.
> So why not treat (x, y) as a tuple until you reach the "->" and then
> reinterpret the contents at that point? This works as long as the syntax
> of a lambda argument list is a subset of the tuple syntax, anyway. If
> that's not the case, parsing gets messier, though I'm sure arbitrary
> lookahead is not be the only possible implementation.

Patterns are not a subset of the expression grammar. For example, ":" 
has meaning in a pattern (type test), but not in an expression.


More information about the Rust-dev mailing list