@dragostis : do you have anything waiting to be commited for pest3 ?
It seems like the last update to quote 1.0 broke the bootstrap. I've tried updating quote to 1.0 in bootstrap as well, but it doesn't seem to work since it uses different version of proc_macro2.
I wish all of this procedural macro was a little bit harder to misuse...
Hi, can any admin of pest-parser update the description of this repo to "Pest Grammar file support for all JetBrains IDEs"?
/cc @dragostis
Is there some (efficient) way to find ta specific inner Rule match on a pair? I am constructing
DateTime<Utc> objects from some input and iterating through all the submatches to find one specific one sounds wrong. Also having a bunch of (defaulted) mutable vars that I fill while iterating feels wrong.
I am mostly concerned about the readbility of the code not so much the runtime costs.
The IntelliJ plugin has been updated with pest 2.1.2
I suppose alpha is ASCII_ALPHA. though you could use ASCII_ALPHANUMERIC builtin rule as it is ASCII_DIGIT | ASCII_ALPHA
Hi. Given only
ident = @{ (alpha | digit)+ }, how come "Foo Bar" parses successfully to ident "Foo"? Why isn't this a failure since you didn't find only a single ident, but two of them? IE there's no rule that expects two idents, just one
This is why I made https://github.com/owo-lang/voile-rs/blob/572a1a8550bb228815558ba1c27c697059bf31c7/voile-util/src/pest_util.rs#L24-L43
like
field = { ident ~ "." ~ ident }
@ice1000 you could probably make your macro into a function, I think. Something like this:
fn strict_parse<'a, P, F, R, T>(rule: R, input: &'a str, f: F)-> Result<T, Error<R>>
where
F: FnOnce(Pair<'a, R>) -> T,
P: Parser<R>,
R: Copy + Debug + Hash + Ord,
{
let rule = P::parse(rule, input)?.next().unwrap();
let end_pos = rule.as_span().end_pos();
if end_pos.pos() < input.len() {
let rest = &input[end_pos.pos()..];
let variant = ErrorVariant::CustomError {
message: format!("Does not consume the following code: '{}'", rest)
};
Err(Error::new_from_pos(variant, end_pos))
} else {
Ok(f(rule))
}
}
(if I remember well)
But you're right
It makes a lot of sense
@TheDan64 : indeed, and I think I understood at last what you want. You need to have a rule that matches "Foo Bar" as ident2 (or whatever), and have a « superior » rule (ident2 | ident), so that if you get ident, you don’t have "Foo Bar". That’s the way pest does work.
To me it sounds like a pest flaw - but anyway I don't mean to sound too critical. Pest is pretty great and I think @ice1000's approach as a function is the best solution so far. Thank you both for the help!
Nadri I had forgotten about this gitter, thanks for reminding me