On 29/10/2019 08:07, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 02:38:54AM +0000, Ramsay Jones wrote:
>> On 28/10/2019 23:03, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote:
>>> diff --git a/parse.c b/parse.c
>>> index 4464e2667..4b0a1566c 100644
>>> --- a/parse.c
>>> +++ b/parse.c
>>> @@ -345,6 +345,7 @@ static struct symbol_op goto_op = {
>>>
>>> static struct symbol_op __context___op = {
>>> .statement = parse_context_statement,
>>> + .attribute = attribute_context,
>>
>> Hmm, so why is do we have a context_op and a __context___op?
>>
>>> };
>>>
>>> static struct symbol_op range_op = {
>>> @@ -537,6 +538,7 @@ static struct init_keyword {
>>> { "while", NS_KEYWORD, .op = &while_op },
>>> { "do", NS_KEYWORD, .op = &do_op },
>>> { "goto", NS_KEYWORD, .op = &goto_op },
>>> + { "context", NS_KEYWORD, .op = &context_op },
>>> { "__context__",NS_KEYWORD, .op = &__context___op },
>>
>> So, can '__context__' be used in a statement, as well as an
>> attribute, while 'context' can only be used in an attribute?
>
> Yes, indeed.
OK, so I wasn't quite as confused as I thought! ;-)
> '__context__' was only parsed as a statement and 'context'
> only as an attribute. But now we also want to be able to use
> '__context__' as an attribute (because 'context' is not a
> reserved keyword and can thus be a used defined macro).
>
> There is no reason, though, we should now also want to use
> 'context' as a statement since it's a sparse extension. Hence
> adding attribute_context to '__context___op' and keeping
> 'context_op' as such (but moving them together).
Thanks for the explanation.
ATB,
Ramsay Jones
