Hi Niklas,
1) My most desired feature would be a syntax tree that does not pluck
> pluck comments out and make me treat them separately. It looks much
> easier to me to have a fully descriptive tree and (filter . concatMap) /
> traverse them out in some way than getting a list of comments and having
> to insert them back in the right places myself.
> Is that possible?
>
Sadly not - it's theoretically impossible. The fact that you can put
comments literally wherever, means that it's impossible to treat them as
nodes of the AST. E.g.
f {- WHERE -} x = -- WOULD
-- THESE
do -- COMMENTS
a {- END -} <- g x -- UP
return {- ? -} a
What would be theoretically possible is to define a restricted language
that allows comments only in certain well-defined places (cf haddock), and
ignores any others. That's a lot of work though, and it's not clear how big
the gain is. :-\
A different solution could be to improve the support, through better helper
functions, for handling a syntax tree and a list of comments together.
That's something I think could be worthwhile.
> 2) Have you considered downloading the all-of-Hackage tarball and
> running haskell-src-exts over it to get a benchmark of how much HSE can
> already parse of the Haskell code out there?
>
Considered, yes. Done, no. Would love to see the results :-). The crew at
OdHac (Roman, Erik, Simon) ensured that the current version handles all of
'base', which is a good start.
Cheers, Niklas
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
