[m-dev.] Record syntax: possible bug?

[Fergus Henderson]

On 12-Feb-2001, Ralph Becket <rbeck at microsoft.com> wrote:
> If I write 
> 
> :- func foo ^ bar = baz.
> 
> then I get ``effor: undefined type `bar'/0''
> 
> It seems to me that the `^' notation should be translated in declarations
> as well as definitions.  Is the above a design decision or an omission?

IMHO an omission -- a good idea, which has been suggested before, but that
has just not yet implemented. 

In December, I suggested that the `^' notation be allowed in function
definitions [1], and Peter Schachte followed up saying that would be
nice, and suggesting that they also be allowed in function
declarations [2].  There were no further comments on it in that thread,
so I guess the concensus must have been in favour of it.

[1] <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/research/mercury/mailing-lists/mercury-developers/mercury-developers.0012/0052.html>.
[2] <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/research/mercury/mailing-lists/mercury-developers/mercury-developers.0012/0054.html>.

-- 
Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs.mu.oz.au>  |  "I have always known that the pursuit
                                    |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>  |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-developers mailing list
Post messages to:       mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Administrative Queries: owner-mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Subscriptions:          mercury-developers-request at cs.mu.oz.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------------