Re: [ghc-steering-committee] #344: Negative Literals Improved, rec: accept

Huh, good to know. I just looked at how it is done, and we are literally peeking at the characters surrounding tokens and running a bit of Haskell to guess the classification of the previous/next token. Seems a bit brittle but I guess this is not something that is likely to change. I am also surprised it didn't slow down the lexer, but maybe it's lost in the noise. Anyway, I don't have a strong opinion on the proposal as this is an extension I never use, but the proposed behavior seems more intuitive for humans, so it seems reasonable to accept it. Iavor On Wed, Jul 22, 2020, 06:49 Richard Eisenberg wrote:

On Jul 22, 2020, at 1:43 PM, Joachim Breitner wrote:

Just as a note, I never quite understood how we plan to implement #229---is it supposed to be done through state in the lexer, or do we have a simple lexer that keeps all tokens, including white space, and then write a post-processing function to glue and rejigger tokens?

No idea here.

#229 is in fact already implemented: https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/merge_requests/1664 I don't remember the details to explain them, but I don't think it turned out hard to implement.

Richard _______________________________________________ ghc-steering-committee mailing list ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee