docs: remove stale func from pipe statement keywords#6087
Merged
Conversation
`func` no longer begins a statement; it only introduces an anonymous function expression. Functions are declared with `let name = func ...`.
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Nightly survey finding.
reference/syntax/pipes.mdlistedfuncas a statement keyword ("before a new statement, which starts withletorfrom(orfunc)"), butfuncno longer begins a statement in current PRQL — it only introduces an anonymous-function expression (func x -> ...); functions are declared withlet name = func ....Evidence: the statement parser accepts only module / type / import / var-def statements (
prqlc-parser/src/parser/stmt.rs—choice((module_def, type_def(), import_def(), var_def()))), andfuncis parsed as an expression bylambda_func(prqlc-parser/src/parser/expr.rs). Thefunc add x -> ...statement form was valid in much older PRQL, so the note is stale.No automated test: this is a prose bullet in the book with no executable code block to assert against.