This proposal is not a part of the binary AST proposal. Because that proposal wants a binary representation and will not generate AST directly from the ecmascript spec. Because run those parsers in browser is pretty slow. Since the JS engine can already parse the JavaScript code, just expose those interfaces will make things easier.
Out of curiosity, what is the expected benefit wrt Esprima, Babel or > Shift? In particular since there is no standard AST for ECMAScript yet [1]? > > Cheers, > David > > [1] Ok, that's a subset of https://github.com/tc39/proposal-binary-ast, > which is in the pipes. > > On 14/09/2019 07:46, Jack Works wrote: > > Just like DOMParser <http://mdn.io/DOMParser> in HTML and Houdini's > > parser API in CSS > > <https://github.com/WICG/CSS-Parser-API/blob/master/README.md>, a > > built-in parser for ECMAScript itself is quite useful in many ways. > > > > Check out https://github.com/Jack-Works/proposal-ecmascript-parser for > > details (and also, finding champions!) > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > es-discuss mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > > >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
