Syntax and validation for struct.new_desc#101
Conversation
And struct.new_default_desc. Also update the valiation for struct.new and struct.new_default to require empty descriptors. Add an explanation of expansion to desctype to the validation conventions section and teach SpecTec about the new ExpandDesc relation to avoid errors during rendering.
|
Heads-up: busy with POPL deadline, will review next week. |
|
Sounds good, thanks for the heads up. I'll continue to upload PRs, but no rush on the reviews. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Couple of nits below, but I think they are actually moot considering the following more important question:
I'm not sure why we need both Expand and ExpandDesc instead of merely modifying the existing Expand. As defined, Expand: deftype ~~ comptype and ExpandDesc: deftype ~~ comptype actually are equivalent (the latter pattern-matching describestype? descriptortype? as both empty).
(One motivation to have both might be to avoid a lot of clutter in the future, should we allow describes on more types than just structs — instead of matching describestype? descriptortype? all over the place, the existing Expand could be a shorthand building that in. However, in that case we'd need different notation, or rendered "deftype ≈ comptype" could ambiguously mean either expanding to a the underlying comptype via Expand, ignoring the desc clauses, or expanding to a desctype with empty desc clause via ExpandDesc.)
In addition, I think you missed a bunch of uses of Expand on structs in 7.1.
| $${relation-ignore: Expand Expand_use} | ||
| $${definition-ignore: expanddt} | ||
|
|
||
| We use the same notation to denote the expansion of a :ref:`defined type <syntax-deftype>` or :ref:`type use <syntax-typeuse>` to a :ref:`desctype <syntax-desctype>` as well. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I tried to avoid the first-person "we" in the spec. Just say "The same notation also denotes...".
| relation ExpandDesc: deftype ~~ desctype hint(macro "%expanddt_to_desctype") hint(tabular) | ||
| hint(prose "The :ref:`expansion <aux-expand-deftype-to-desctype>` of %1 is %2") ;; TODO(3, ?): avoid hardcoding reST | ||
|
|
||
| rule ExpandDesc: deftype ~~ desctype -- if $expanddt_to_desctype(deftype) = desctype |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: for consistency
| rule ExpandDesc: deftype ~~ desctype -- if $expanddt_to_desctype(deftype) = desctype | |
| rule Expand_desc: deftype ~~ desctype -- if $expanddt_to_desctype(deftype) = desctype |
2 participants
And struct.new_default_desc. Also update the valiation for struct.new and struct.new_default to require empty descriptors. Add an explanation of expansion to desctype to the validation conventions section and teach SpecTec about the new ExpandDesc relation to avoid errors during rendering.