Fixed bugs in Spec parser for terminals (#145) #146
Conversation
| @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ trait Parsers extends LangParsers { | |||
|
|
|||
| /** terminals */ | |||
| lazy val term: Parser[Terminal] = { | |||
| "`[^`]+`|```".r ^^ { | |||
| "`[^`]+`|`[`]+`".r ^^ { | |||
| case str => | |||
| Terminal(str.substring(1, str.length - 1)) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't 1 be replaced with the length of the delimiter here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When would the length of the delimiter not be 1?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm unsure what 4 or more backticks in a row is supposed to mean. It doesn't appear to be legal. So I don't know.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ecmarkup accepts 4 backticks and renders it as a literal terminal consisting of two backticks: 2418 preview
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm reading the code for grammarkdown and it doesn't seem it would support 4 backticks in a row, though I could be misreading. Does it have something to do with tc39/ecma262#2418 using ` and the entities being processed by esmeta but not grammarkdown?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ESMeta unescapes the HTML entities before parsing the spec.html. Thus, the text ```` is unescaped as: ````, and ESMeta parses the four backticks (````) as a literal terminal consists of two backticks (``) because the first and last backtick is used to represent literal terminals. I supported this feature because tc39/ecma262#2418 defines the literal terminal consisting of two backticks. Is there any problem with this extension?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Okay, that should be fine then. I didn't know about the pre-processing of HTML entities by esmeta.
| @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ trait Parsers extends LangParsers { | |||
|
|
|||
| /** terminals */ | |||
| lazy val term: Parser[Terminal] = { | |||
| "`[^`]+`|```".r ^^ { | |||
| "`[^`]+`|`[`]+`".r ^^ { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The docs for grammarkdown don't mention this: https://github.com/rbuckton/grammarkdown#terminals
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There are a few things (used by the ES spec) that the grammarkdown docs don't mention or aren't clear on. I think that's more of an issue for grammarkdown than for esmeta.
I fixed a bug in the
Specparser for terminals.The PR tc39/ecma262#2418 in ecma262 defines a new terminal:
``as follows:However, the current
Specparser for terminals only supports a single quote`. So, I fixed this problem by extending theSpecparser to support one or more repetitions of`.