Skip to content

Conversation

gregsdennis
Copy link

@gregsdennis gregsdennis commented Apr 20, 2023

Adds an optional index manipulation to the syntax.

handrews and others added 7 commits January 18, 2023 12:31
Taking the index of the result of an index manipulation was
shown in the example and intended to work, but left out of
the ABNF apparently by accident.

Also, rework the ABNF to keep it within the text RFC line width.
Also, use <sourcecode> tag.
Somehow this was left out of the main syntax description
paragraph entirely.
The current draft allows for an index adjustment of "0" which
creates ambiguity because "1/foo", "1+0/foo", and "1-0/foo"
are now three different ways to write a pointer with the exact
same effect.

This complicates round-trips between textual and functional
representations, the original text would need to be preserved
in order to re-constitute it correctly.  There is no need for
this added complication.
@gregsdennis
Copy link
Author

🤦 I created this in your fork.

@handrews
Copy link
Owner

@gregsdennis 🤣

(it's pretty easy to do, admittedly)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants