2012/1/31 Allen Wirfs-Brock <[email protected]>: > > On Jan 31, 2012, at 2:36 PM, Waldemar Horwat wrote: > >> On 01/28/2012 02:54 PM, Erik Arvidsson wrote: >>> Under the open issues for Quasi Literals, >>> http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:quasis#nesting , the >>> topic of nesting is brought up. >>> >>> After implementing Quasi Literals in Traceur it is clear that >>> supporting nested quasi literals is easier than not supporting them. >>> What is the argument for not supporting nesting? Can we resolve this? >> >> This has been hashed out in committee before. Do you have a solution to the >> grammar problems, such as having a full ECMAScript parser inside the lexer? >> You can't just count parentheses because that breaks regexps. > > I would think the solution to this is pretty straightforward. Basically, a > Quasi is not a single token. the grammar in the proposal can almost be read > that way right now. It should only take a little cleanup to factor it into > a pure lexical part and a syntactic part. A few [no whitespace here] tokens > will probably be needed
I addressed this at http://js-quasis-libraries-and-repl.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/tokenize.html _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
