rule(:a) { a_properly_formed_a | consume_anything_upto_the_next_tag_start }
rule(:consume_anything_upto_the_next_tag_start) { (start_tag_token.absent?
>> any).repeat(1) }
sorry forgot the repeat
---
"No man is an island... except Philip"
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Nigel Thorne <[email protected]>
wrote:
> The only solution I can think of is to have rules that have some generic
> catch all as a options...
>
>
> so...
>
> rule(:a) { a_properly_formed_a | consume_anything_upto_the_next_tag_start
> }
> rule(:consume_anything_upto_the_next_tag_start) { start_tag_token.absent?
> >> any }
>
>
>
>
> ---
> "No man is an island... except Philip"
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Ryan Schlesinger <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Is there a simple way to get parslet to be more forgiving in parsing
>> unknown tokens?
>>
>> We’re collaborating on a dmarc record parser that uses parslet and we’ve
>> run across a paragraph in the spec that turns our current understanding on
>> its head.
>> See:&nb sp;https://github.com/trailofbits/dmarc/pull/6
>>
>> We need to ignore unknown tags and ‘should’ discard syntax errors.
>>
>>
>
