On 27/10/2014 22:53, landaire wrote:
On Monday, 27 October 2014 at 22:43:55 UTC, Jeremy Powers via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
From my mucking about before, I think you'll get more mileage from using
libdparse directly than trying to (re)implement a parser for the plugin.
For one, you save yourself all the pain of fixing weird edge cases and
keeping up to date.
I agree, but integrating something external with IntelliJ's platform
seems like kind of a PITA. It looks like a lot of stuff makes heavy use
of PSI trees (see:
https://confluence.jetbrains.com/display/IDEADEV/Developing+Custom+Language+Plugins+for+IntelliJ+IDEA#DevelopingCustomLanguagePluginsforIntelliJIDEA-ImplementingaParserandPSI)
I'm no expert in developing IntelliJ plugins either though...
Have you considered the option of creating a Psi parser than creates
PsiElements from the AST parsed by DDT's DTool ? That would should be
fairly straightforward.
With of a fork of DDT/Dtool, you can even easily modify the DDT/Dtool
parser to generate those PsiElements directly.
--
Bruno Medeiros
https://twitter.com/brunodomedeiros
