Difference in complexity of IDE's parser and Compiler's parser feels like order of magnitude IDE's you want to be very fast, so you use techniques like partial

Difference in complexity of IDE's parser and Compiler's parser feels like order of magnitude IDE's you want to be very fast, so you use techniques like partial tree reparse and now when I think about it, then you also may need to update other places like you use type that is defined somewhere below and at first parse that type definition doesn't compile, so type usage above shows an error and when you change type definition so it compiles, then if you only update that part of the tree, then previous would still scream about the error it's really tricky the theory behind how to deal with all of this problems seems to be easy but when you actually get to the coding, then you have to be really thoughtful, careful and experienced in order to get the modeling of right https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/shows/seth-juarez/anders-hejlsberg-on-modern-compiler-construction https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/shows/seth-juarez/anders-h... ________ I have some experience with simpler and more complex parsers and for me no other type of software requires this much careful thought as parsers do if you want to address all those things like correctness, speed and recovery on broken code fragments, good error messages, good code, maybe concurrency