docs(lang): precise reserved-name rule — member-name positions are EXEMPT [F0.6]

AGRA RULING (issue 0089, attempt 7): bare reserved-name MEMBER positions are
intentionally exempt from the reserved-type-name rule, and the implementation
already does the right thing — this is a docs + one-example change, no code.

The exempt member positions are struct FIELD names, union TAG names, and protocol
method-SIGNATURE names: they sit in a member slot, are reached via obj.name (or
dispatched by string), and are never type-classified, so they never mis-lower.
The backtick is optional there. The exemption stops at member DEFINITIONS: an
impl method is a real function (reached through the impl_block -> fn_decl arm), so
a reserved-spelled impl method still needs the backtick, exactly like a free
function (cf. examples/1122) — and every bare reserved-name value binding /
declaration name still errors (0076 preserved).

- specs.md / readme.md: replace the "every binding site" / "any binding site"
  overclaim with the precise rule — required positions (value bindings +
  declaration names + impl method definitions) vs the exempt member-name
  positions (field / tag / protocol signature; backtick optional).
- examples/0158-types-reserved-name-member-exempt.sx: pins the exempt behavior —
  bare reserved-name struct fields + union tag read & written bare AND via
  backtick, and a protocol with a bare reserved-name method dispatched through
  the protocol (impl definition takes the backtick).
- issues/0089: document the member-name exemption in the RESOLVED banner + add
  0158 to the regression list.

Gate: zig build, zig build test, bash tests/run_examples.sh — all green
(430 passed, 0 failed, 0 timed out).
This commit is contained in:
agra
2026-06-04 22:17:53 +03:00
parent 724a919fc1
commit d14e29be02
7 changed files with 118 additions and 16 deletions

View File

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
0

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
fields bare = 10 20
fields tick = 10 20
fields set = 11 21
union = 5 5
dispatch = 7