Douglas Philips wrote:
What would be the proper way to propose that:
( exp1 , ... , expk ) (tuple, k>=2) [ exp1 , ... , expk ] (list, k>=1) be amended to: ( exp1 , ... , expk [ , ] ) (tuple, k>=2) [ exp1 , ... , expk [ , ] ] (list, k>=1)
I think a problem with the above proposal is that by allowing an optional trailing comma the compiler can no longer detect as an error the case where the programmer has simply just forgotten to fill in the last element of the tuple/list. The existing syntax forces the user to do some extra work fiddling about with commas but the reward is that the compiler can verify that you haven't forgotten the last argument. About a year ago I proposed (on the cafe) a syntax sugar to avoid commas in tuples and lists which made use of the layout rule something like: let a = #[ -- introduces new layout block first second third let b = #( one two As an aside it would also be nice to be able to use layout for function arguments as in: do a <- foo #bracket_ enter exit action the general idea being that '#' immediately followed by an identifier (which may be qualified) or the symbol '(' or '[' would start a layout block. ('#' of course would no longer be able to be used in symbolic identifiers) Brian. -- http://www.metamilk.com