But the point is that you _won't actually know that_ since you have circular dependencies.
-
-
Replying to @cmuratori @AMadan4 and
You have to be able to stop in the middle of parsing a function and _wait_ for the type.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori @AMadan4 and
Because maybe the definition of that type required the function!! For example...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I don't see any practical reason for implementing parsers in any other way, though
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Any other way than what?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Than having multiple passes or "waiting".
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Right but the whole point here is that those are not recursive decent parsers anymore!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori @AMadan4 and
At a minimum you have to change from recursion to manual stack-based, right? So you can wait.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori @AMadan4 and
I mean I guess you could create a thread per top-level statement or something crazy but ugh.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Or you just pass through the code, get AST, resolve ambiguities -> compile, etc
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Potentially n^2 times, if the definitions go in reverse order?
-
-
Replying to @cmuratori @AMadan4 and
He talked about this. Flatten recursion of declarations and switch when hit unknown one.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.