Closed apblack closed 8 years ago
????
Is this a sardonic comment on our current state?
No, it isn't. I just put ...
in some incomplete code that I was writing, and was surprised that it ran without generating any sort of error.
I'd like to be able to test code with ...
in it, but really, do we want to put that in the spec?
I propose that evaluating ...
should lead to an immediate error.
I don't mind that, but agree it probably shouldn't be in the spec (maybe an appendix?)
We agreed long ago that we should have
...
in Grace, so that examples containing...
could be compiled. I don't recall that we agreed on the semantics of...
I had in mind that
...
was essentially a "nice" wrong, so that attempting to evaluate it would "go wrong", but not cause silent non-termination like ⊥.I was a bit surprised to find that in minigrace evaluating
...
is s no-op. In other words, as a command,...
is equivalent toskip
. (As a value, it's distinct from other objects.)Is this what we want? I'm inclined to think that evaluating
...
should raise an exception, but couldn't decide of what kind. A sub-kind ofProgrammingError
?