Lex Spoon wrote: > On this list, the => form has so far been dismissed due to parsing > concerns. If that's the only reason, let me try and allay that worry > and put that horse back in the race. Scala also has a comma operator, > but it still manages to parse the => syntax. They way it does it is > to initially parse an expression and then, if it sees a =>, > reinterpret what it has seen so far as a parameter list. It's an > unusual parsing strategy, but it works well and the issue is > localized. >
I don't think anyone is suggesting that it would be too difficult to parse for bottom-up parsers. It's just that it makes it difficult for a certain common class of bottom-up parsers, namely the LALR(k) for fixed k parser generators, to parse. Personally, since I'm not responsible for any ES/JS implementation, I don't care about this difficulty, but a quick search for "ecmascript lalr" reveals that there are such existing parsers. P.S. Take everything I say with a grain of salt, since I'm not really an expert on parsing. _______________________________________________ Es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
