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
Module after type checking:
module ProdAssoc
Declarations: [
[@ ]
visible let t1 : Type = (tuple3 int int int)
[@ ]
visible let t2 : Type = (tuple2 (tuple2 int int) int)
[@ ]
visible let t3 : Type = (tuple2 int (tuple2 int int))
[@ ]
visible let t4 : Type = (tuple3 int int int)
]
Exports: [
[@ ]
visible let t1 : Type = (tuple3 int int int)
[@ ]
visible let t2 : Type = (tuple2 (tuple2 int int) int)
[@ ]
visible let t3 : Type = (tuple2 int (tuple2 int int))
[@ ]
visible let t4 : Type = (tuple3 int int int)
]
Verified module: ProdAssoc
All verification conditions discharged successfully
So
The pretty printer is being very misleading with nested tuples and we should definitely fix that.
Looks like & only "composes" with itself and not with * to make larger tuples. Maybe that's ok.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The resugaring confusion is now fixed by the PR above. As for & and * having different precedence levels, I think that is fine as-is. Regardless we should move to using & uniformly for tuples (more PRs incoming).
--dump_module
shows...but! with
--ugly
we seeSo
&
only "composes" with itself and not with*
to make larger tuples. Maybe that's ok.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: