> core of the problem .. no dedicated slot Yes and no - it's relatively easy to add a "comment slot" to every node (like the upstream AST has a magic comment field that is used sometimes and how `nph` has 3 - pre/mid/post-comment) - what's hard is knowing which node a particular comment belongs to while parsing - for this, there is no consistent rule that's possible to apply, partially because the grammar itself is somewhat random for different nodes, both when parsing comments but also when parsing the nodes themselves - ie `optInd` vs `flexComment` vs indAndComment` vs "mandatory vs optional comma" vs "mandatory vs optional indent" and so on - many composed nodes (like identdefs but also `procty` etc) differ in where indent and comments are allowed "inside" the node (before and after the `:` \- before and after the `=` etc).
When we also take into account concepts, generics, post and do expressions, they all show significant departures from each other in terms of rules for whitespace and comment, so the proper "attaching" of comment to nodes becomes problematic in and of itself, even if a proper space for them existed in the AST.
