Thanks Eliot,

2016-07-26 21:24 GMT+02:00 Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda@gmail.com>:

Hi Nicolai,

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,

is this valid pragma syntax:

foo
�� <func: #operation arg: #+>
�� ^ self

You could say it was ambiguous.�� With the change to the syntax of binary selectors in recent years #+> is a binary selector, and so you need whitespace after the token to separate it from the closing >.

I was a bit supprised, why '+>' would be a binary selector, as�� for example greater-or-equal is ">=" and not "=>". But I like that we can define (any?) combination as binary selector and create new ones like
=>
==>

or
-->

��

(note the closing angle and the +-symbol)

The above code is what the pretty printer creates if you pretty-print this code

IMO, the pretty printer is the thing that needs fixing.�� If the last token in the pragma is a binary selector symbol literal then a space should be printed.

:( yes, but I don't like that we need to insert spaces.

��

��

foo
�� <func: #operation arg: #+ >
�� ^ self

(note the space between #+ and >

Or a bug in the parser ?

this pragma definition
�� <func: #operation arg: #a>
seems to work.

_,,,^..^,,,_
best,��Eliot