Gabriele Monaco <[email protected]> writes: > It looks very neat! I didn't go through it fully just yet, though. > This one works fine but there's a nit: the ASTNode's id starts from 1, but > apparently the new grammar consider RULE as a node too, this results in > variables in the generated header file starting from val2 (rather than val1). > > Unless I missed something here, we should probably start from 0:
Yep, thanks! > Also it doesn't gracefully handle an invalid syntax, but that's probably > still a > work in progress. We could catch Lark's exception. I will look into it. Nam
