>> kevin curtis wrote: >>> Is a 'canonical' AST part of the plans for ecmascript 6/harmony.
> On May 9, 2009, at 9:19 AM, David-Sarah Hopwood wrote: >> I hope so; that would be extremely useful. I would like to see an >> ECMAScript source -> AST parser (as well as an AST evaluator) in the >> Harmony standard library. On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 11:57 AM, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> wrote: > We've wanted this since early in ES4 days. It would help many projects and > experimental extensions (type checkers, template systems, macro processors, > etc.) to have a standard AST, which could be serialized to JSON. Other neat uses for the AST would potentially include comment scraping for automated documentation tools and minification, which have their own requirements beyond those for execution, optimization, and static analysis. Upon further reflection, I'm not sure that parse(program:String):AST would serve the purpose of fast sandboxing. The intent of splitting parse and execute is to reduce the cost of execution, so that modules can be reused in many small sandboxes. Having parse produce a (mutable) AST, and then leaving execute to translate the AST for the interpreter might constrain our options for producing the desired performance. It might be better to have a compile() routine that returns an opaque, engine-specific Program object that can in turn be executed multiple times. Kris Kowal _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
