Only allow pair (Maybe FunctionTypeDeclaration, FunctionDeclaration) as Statement ?

[desmond-dsouza]

Since a FunctionTypeDeclaration without a corresponding FunctionDeclaration is not legal (syntax?) in Elm, would it be useful to change:

type Statement
    = ...
    | FunctionTypeDeclaration Name Type
    | FunctionDeclaration Name (List Expression) Expression
    | ...

to:

type alias FunctionTypeDeclaration = FunctionTypeDeclaration Name Type
type alias FunctionDeclaration = FunctionDeclaration Name (List Expression) Expression
type Statement
    = ...
    | FunctionDefinition 
           (Maybe FunctionTypeDeclaration, FunctionDeclaration)
    | ...

with corresponding tweak to parser rules?

[joonazan]

There are countless cases like this. There needs to be another layer on top of the parser that outputs a representation that disallows invalid syntax.

…

On 16 Jun 2017 5:48 p.m., "desmond-dsouza" ***@***.***> wrote: Since a FunctionTypeDeclaration without a corresponding FunctionDeclaration is not legal (syntax?) in Elm, would it be useful to change: type Statement = ... | FunctionTypeDeclaration Name Type | FunctionDeclaration Name (List Expression) Expression | ... to: type alias FunctionTypeDeclaration = FunctionTypeDeclaration Name Type type alias FunctionDeclaration = FunctionDeclaration Name (List Expression) Expression type Statement = ... | FunctionDefinition (Maybe FunctionTypeDeclaration, FunctionDeclaration) | ... with corresponding tweak to parser rules? — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#66>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AL3sFOd9HPrCxJ77UXjvnDBvkayb-u_fks5sEpXKgaJpZM4N8jaL> .

[desmond-dsouza]

ok, thanks for the feedback

[wende]

Closing since it's very disruptive and it yields little value