Fix in-out grammar underproduction #199
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
The old grammar didn't allow things like f(&x.y) which are legal in Swift. The new grammar allows a bunch of stuff -- literals, closures, and conditional expressions -- but that's a better problem to have. See also this PR, where we're discussing a more specific fix: swiftlang#194
amartini51
changed the title
bjlanier
approved these changes
Oct 20, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The old grammar didn't allow things like f(&x.y) which are legal in Swift. The new grammar allows a bunch of stuff -- literals, closures, and conditional expressions -- but that's a better problem to have.
See also #194, where we're discussing a more specific fix.
Fixes: #193 (partially)