You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Afaik, the only support we have for something like lambda abstraction of operator in the Apalache IR is through let/in expressions like LET f(...) == ... IN f. When we need to construct an anonymous operator (e.g., in quint conversion), we get something that looks like this. However, it is not possible to apply an operator-expression of this form, as in (LET f(...) == ... IN f)(x). This has been discussed on #2483 and #2500.
I think one of the following should be done:
Add support for applying operator of this form
Catch and report these malformed expressions in the builder
(1) seems preferable and would make quint conversion easier, but I don't know how difficult it would be. (2) would at least lest us catch this inconvenience at the earliest opportunity, preventing an easy mistake.
Afaik, the only support we have for something like lambda abstraction of operator in the Apalache IR is through let/in expressions like
LET f(...) == ... IN f
. When we need to construct an anonymous operator (e.g., in quint conversion), we get something that looks like this. However, it is not possible to apply an operator-expression of this form, as in(LET f(...) == ... IN f)(x)
. This has been discussed on #2483 and #2500.I think one of the following should be done:
(1) seems preferable and would make quint conversion easier, but I don't know how difficult it would be. (2) would at least lest us catch this inconvenience at the earliest opportunity, preventing an easy mistake.
WDYT @konnov and @Kukovec?
cc/ @gabrielamafra
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: