[m-dev.] :- mode foo == ... (was for review: tuples [1])

[Fergus Henderson]

On 03-Aug-2000, Tyson Dowd <trd at cs.mu.OZ.AU> wrote:
> On 02-Aug-2000, Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs.mu.OZ.AU> wrote:
> > On 01-Aug-2000, Ralph Becket <rbeck at microsoft.com> wrote:
> > > Also, another vote for the rationalisation of the equality/definition
> > > symbols.  Would it be possible to just add == as an alternative to ::
> > > for mode definitions - or is this already the case?  I seem to recall
> > > Fergus saying something to the effect.
> > 
> > Yes, the compiler already allows "==" as an alternative to "::".
> 
> I have a change that also allows >> as an alternative to -> in mode
> definitions.  It's very small and very simple.

I think that is a good idea.

> I'm willing to change the documentation and so on to say that == and >>
> are the "correct" operators to use here.

OK, in that case the documentation for `inst' declarations should
also be changed to say that `==' should be used.

> :: and -> will continue to be
> accepted, since they don't cause any problems for the compiler (although
> using :: in this situation might confuse users).  Eventually we may want
> to deprecate :: and -> in mode definitions.

That all sounds good to me.

-- 
Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs.mu.oz.au>  |  "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>  |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger fjh at 128.250.37.3        |     -- 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
--------------------------------------------------------------------------