3 ms·
Yeah, I was going to get into the implementation when I was going to figure out what `path` should be, which was also when I decided the post was getting too lo
by carols10cents 11y ago
Yeah, I was going to get into the implementation when I was going to figure out what `path` should be, which was also when I decided the post was getting too long ;)
Note that src/grammar/parser-lalr.y is a reference grammar for testing [1] and the actual implementation is in src/libsyntax, afaik.
[1] - https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/21452 https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/21452
- e12e 11y agoSo, there's three "official" grammars for Rust? The one in the documentation, the reference grammar (that serves as documentation and testing) - and the actual grammar, used in the reference implementation? No wonder there are inconsistencies... Sounds like paring it down to two: a reference/testing grammar that is well documented; perhaps written/maintained with a literate programming tool and the actual implementation is a good idea. Kill off the "only documentation" grammar and/or merge it with the larl-one.
- acqq 11y agoI was also wondering why not autogenerating a "documentation" grammar out of the working code.
- steveklabnik 11y agoThere were only three temporarily: today, the reference grammar is all gone, subsumed into the documentation/testing grammar.