Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Specs Proposal: Split predeclared library names from Names section #568

Closed
btzy opened this issue Apr 23, 2020 · 1 comment
Closed

Specs Proposal: Split predeclared library names from Names section #568

btzy opened this issue Apr 23, 2020 · 1 comment
Assignees
Labels
Enhancement New feature or request important Fixing this is important, but not mission-critical

Comments

@btzy
Copy link
Contributor

btzy commented Apr 23, 2020

The "Names" section in the specification contain two rather distinct things:

  • The allowable characters that make a valid name (a language concern)
  • The standard library names that are predeclared in Source (a library concern)

These two concerns should not be mixed in the same section because they are quite different in nature.

I propose that the "Names" section should only contain the language concerns, and a separate "Standard Library" section should contain the definition of the standard library functions, and also specifies that:

  • Source has some predeclared names, which act as if the following line was prefixed to the program: import * from '/* implementation defined library location */'; (This definition of predeclared names allow them to be shadowed by variables with the same name declared by the user.)
@martin-henz
Copy link
Member

I agree. Will try to fix this.

@martin-henz martin-henz self-assigned this Jul 22, 2020
@martin-henz martin-henz added Enhancement New feature or request important Fixing this is important, but not mission-critical labels Jul 22, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Enhancement New feature or request important Fixing this is important, but not mission-critical
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants