- Processes:
- Grammar contains inject and drop. Both produce processes from names. Inject is not implemented in the compiler.
- Top level production: In the spec only a contract declaration may be at the top level, but in the grammar any non-par process may be at the top level, and with braces, any process may be at the top level.
- Pattern binding: In grammar, each bind may have its own conditional. In spec, there is a single conditional associated with all the binds.
- Select branches may include a conditional in the grammar. In the spec, they may not.
- Foldl and FoldR aren't in the spec
- Print is also missing from the spec.
- Semantics for sending more than one process?
- For channels, grammar currently only supports quoted process and variables. No other channels supported in grammar.
- Quantities: Grammar supports richer group of quantities. Map(), Double, String, are not in spec.
- In grammar quantities also support arithmetic. This suggests we'll want typing rules and checking for the expressions.
- Grammar supports field access via dot. I've seen this used in example contracts, but it's not in the spec.
- Entities: Most of the entity types in the spec are commented out in the grammar. Only characters and tuples are left. It's not obvious why a string is a quantity and a char is an entity.
- Patterns:
- Val pattern in grammar allows matching of structs, but entity grammar prevents construction of structs.
- No Array or struct pattern in grammar.
- Inject present again.
- For process patterns, grammar allows new, and contract construction.
Continuation Saturated Form
This is mentioned in the spec. De-sugared Rholang in CSF might be a good form for optimizations.