Document the grammar parsed by each ast type
#393
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jhump
reviewed
Dec 18, 2024
experimental/ast/path.go
Outdated
Comment on lines
35
to
38
| // Path := `.`? component (sep component)* | ||
| // | ||
| // component := Ident | `(` Path `)` | ||
| // sep := `.` | `/` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's make the case consistently PascalCase here, too. Though we could use snake_case for "ident" since it's a lexical element that isn't defined in here.
Suggested change
| // Path := `.`? component (sep component)* | |
| // | |
| // component := Ident | `(` Path `)` | |
| // sep := `.` | `/` | |
| // Path := `.`? Component (Sep Component)* | |
| // | |
| // Component := ident | `(` Path `)` | |
| // Sep := `.` | `/` |
jhump
approved these changes
Dec 20, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I chose to use modified regex syntax for the grammar definition, for two reasons:
EBNF is quite verbose and difficult to read, which is why it's not actually used by very many language specifications (Go and Python are the only ones I can think of that do; C++, Java, Rust, and EcmaScript all use something closer to regular expressions; none of them use
{}and[]the way EBNF does).Everyone knows regex syntax, and I frankly find it more succinct and easier to follow.