code review 69020045: spec: slightly rephrased wording on parsing ambiguity f...

spec: slightly rephrased wording on parsing ambiguity for composite literals

Fixes issue 4482.

[gri, 2014-02-26 21:38:38]

Hello r@golang.org, iant@golang.org, rsc@golang.org, ken@golang.org (cc:
golang-codereviews@googlegroups.com),

I'd like you to review this change to
https://code.google.com/p/go/

[r, 2014-02-26 21:45:09]

LGTM after tweak

https://codereview.appspot.com/69020045/diff/60001/doc/go_spec.html
File doc/go_spec.html (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/69020045/diff/60001/doc/go_spec.html#newcode2283
doc/go_spec.html:2283: an "if", "for", or "switch" statement, and the opening
brace of the
s/, and/In that case,

[gri, 2014-02-26 21:51:38]

https://codereview.appspot.com/69020045/diff/60001/doc/go_spec.html
File doc/go_spec.html (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/69020045/diff/60001/doc/go_spec.html#newcode2283
doc/go_spec.html:2283: an "if", "for", or "switch" statement, and the opening
brace of the
On 2014/02/26 21:45:10, r wrote:
> s/, and/In that case,

The crucial tweak is in this "and": only _if_ we have a literal of that form
_and_ the opening brace is confused with the one of the block do we have an
ambiguity.

Basically a trick to avoid having to describe the syntactic requirements in
excruciating detail (the issue is exactly that a composite literal appears
_lexically_ between the keyword and the opening { of a block, but it's inside a
closure, so there's no ambiguity).

[r, 2014-02-26 22:03:45]

https://codereview.appspot.com/69020045/diff/60001/doc/go_spec.html
File doc/go_spec.html (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/69020045/diff/60001/doc/go_spec.html#newcode2283
doc/go_spec.html:2283: an "if", "for", or "switch" statement, and the opening
brace of the
in that case i don't like this edit, because there is no definition of "is
confused with"

[gri, 2014-02-27 03:47:02]

Hello r@golang.org, iant@golang.org, rsc@golang.org, ken@golang.org (cc:
golang-codereviews@googlegroups.com),

Please take another look.

[r, 2014-02-27 05:00:34]

LGTM

[r, 2014-02-27 05:01:18]

perhaps s/confused with/erroneously parsed as/

[gri, 2014-02-27 16:57:34]

*** Submitted as https://code.google.com/p/go/source/detail?r=64a7cd351692 ***

spec: slightly rephrased wording on parsing ambiguity for composite literals

Fixes issue 4482.

LGTM=r
R=r, iant, rsc, ken
CC=golang-codereviews
https://codereview.appspot.com/69020045

[gobot, 2014-02-27 22:06:08]

This CL appears to have broken the linux-arm-cheney-panda builder.