We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Not sure if this is expected or not but the following declaration does not parse +(x::T,y::T) where {T} = #
+(x::T,y::T) where {T} = #
whereas this correctly does +{T}(x::T,y::T) = #
+{T}(x::T,y::T) = #
I know it works if you use parenthesis, but there seems to be an inconsistency when there is no parens.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The version without parentheses should in my opinion be disallowed. +(1, 2) still looks like a unary operator applied to a tuple.
+(1, 2)
Sorry, something went wrong.
(+)(1, 2) or (+(1, 2)) still looks like an unary operator applied to a tuple, though.
(+)(1, 2)
(+(1, 2))
(+(1, 2)) does, but (+)(1, 2) is fine.
fix #21440, parsing +(x::T,y::T) where {T}
+(x::T,y::T) where {T}
1fe7043
6955932
Merge pull request #21466 from JuliaLang/jb/fix21440
3ccbcf7
fix #21440, parsing `+(x::T,y::T) where {T}`
JeffBezanson
No branches or pull requests
Not sure if this is expected or not but the following declaration does not parse
+(x::T,y::T) where {T} = #
whereas this correctly does
+{T}(x::T,y::T) = #
I know it works if you use parenthesis, but there seems to be an inconsistency when there is no parens.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: