-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
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
LCGS syntax update proposal #190
Comments
Another thing we should consider is the compatibility with future features. If we extend the tool it will probably be with weights and probability, so we should make sure the syntax can support these easily. |
If you have suggestions for better names for the Another issue I have with my current suggestion is the use of Relabeling is a very strong feature, but I don't know if we need it. Will it ever be used for anything that is not simply a parameter to the template? |
Future work from 8th semester includes updates to the LCGS syntax in order to make it more consistent and less tedious. This issue is for discussing how that new syntax would look like. Let's first state the design goals:
solution currently, is to copy the expression. This should be solved with a abstraction like functions or similar.
Initial proposal
I propose we update the syntax as follows:
expr
declarations.dynexpr
declarations.var
keyword for variables, simply prepended to the current syntaxvar
keyword plus space is conveniently 4 letters, which makes it align with an indented update expression.action
keyword:
The Mexican Standoff would look like this with this proposed syntax:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: