[–] [S] 1 point 3 months ago

Thank you for letting me know your thoughts!

Automatic semicolon inference has a very big language footprint, similar to the range syntax that the author disliked.

Maybe not "very big", but I agree with your point in principle.

The reason why I think it is worthwhile (compared to e. g. range syntax) is that we are paying for it anyway already:

Good error reporting hinges on parsing not strictly the language that's defined, but understanding the language that people actually write – and people forget ; all the time.

So from my POV I'm turning an error reporting step (that I'd have to implement anyway) into something more useful.

For this feature to be useful, it has to be at least powerful enough to replace format!

To be honest, if all the fancy formatting stuff requires a macro, so be it.

I just don't want to need macros for creating a list and so on.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago

    It's layers and layers of indirections with no clear need and technical decisions that make things unnecessarily complex.

    So your basically writing Regexes in a custom DSL in JavaScript, combined with custom hooks written in C, from which a megabytes-large native-code parser is generated.

    The complexity of the solution does not fit the niche between dead-easy TextMate grammars and plugging into an LSP.

    Don't misunderstand me, I wish there was something filling that niche, but TreeSitter 100% certainly isn't it.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • view more: next ›