2025-08-21T15:15:36Z Nam Cao <[email protected]>:
> We could also rewrite the parser using ply with a well-defined grammar and
> tokenizer, like how the LTL parser is implemented. Doing it this way would
> be easier to validate as well, because the grammar would be mostly
> copy-pasted from the specification.

Good idea, I can look into that and see how hard it's going to be (I'm not 
familiar with ply, but I see it's well documented).

>> Do you have specific examples of what doesn't work?
>
> Two things that I can remember:
>
>   - breaking long lines
>
>   - C-style and C++-style comments
>

Yeah those could break some assumptions (and they shouldn't), especially the 
line breaks.. And supporting it in the current parser may make it just uglier..

Thanks,
Gabriele


Reply via email to