Re: More questions about LSL syntax

To: Patrice Chalin <chalin@cs.concordia.ca>
Subject: Re: More questions about LSL syntax
From: "Stephen J. Garland" <garland@larch.lcs.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 94 17:55:25 -0400
Cc: larch-interest@src.dec.com
Delivery-Date: Tue, 02 Aug 94 15:02:51 -0700
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 28 Jul 94 20:34:26 EDT." <9407290034.aa26749@manitou.cs.concordia.ca>

     You note that the LSL Checker accepts the declarations

	test1: trait
	  introduces
	    __\and  : S -> S
	    = __    : S -> S

and ask what was the intention concerning logicalOp's and eqOp's.  The
intention was that logicalOp's should have the signature Bool,Bool->Bool and
that eqOp's should have the signature S,S->Bool for some sort S.  Your
observation has been entered on the list of bugs to be fixed in the LSL
Checker. 

     The tokenizer in the LSL Checker recognizes /\ as a single token as a
special case.  The fact that the LSL Checker does not recognize // or -/ as
simpleOp's has been entered on the list of LSL bugs.

Reference(s):

More questions about LSL syntax

From: Patrice Chalin <chalin@cs.concordia.ca>

Prev: FWD: CFP Mathematics of Program Construction
Next: More questions about LSL syntax
Index: Larch archive index