On 16/06/14 15:43, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
What's keeping us from having such a tool? It seems that after one has a
decent parser (that also keeps tracks of the source ranges of AST
nodes), it's easy to write code that does syntactic modifications and
then rewrites the source code. And there's several D parsers out there
already - so it should be too much effort to get there.
Even I am working on a tool that can be easily retrofitted for this
Or maybe I am misunderstanding the amount of semantic analysis that
would typically be required? Can someone give some examples of
modifications that would be useful for such a dfix tool? (I haven't yet
had the time to watch the full panel video, if that's relevant)
* The parser haven't been available for that long (I think)
* Can they handle whole language?
* Semantic analysis is needed. Otherwise as soon as someone uses
templates or mixins the tool won't properly work