I like the idea of Parspec.
I was wondering... is there a reason you don't have your examples
grouped by "valid" and "invalid" instead of putting OK and FAIL on the
end of each line?
eg..
parser TOML::Parser
[VALID]
"120381"
"3.14159"
"true"
"1979-05-27T07:32:00Z"
"\"hello world\""
[INVALID]
"0181"
".1"
"truefalse"
"1979l05-27 07:32:00"
"\"hello\nworld\""
"\"hello/world\""
or... maybe mark them as positive or negative examples
value:
+ "120381"
- "0181"
+ "3.14159"
- ".1"
+ "true"
- "truefalse"
+ "1979-05-27T07:32:00Z"
- "1979l05-27 07:32:00"
+ "\"hello world\""
- "\"hello\nworld\""
- "\"hello/world\""
I like the power of the syntax:
"1234" -> ":integer => '1234'"
Are the quotes around the result needed? Is it really a string?
"1234" -> {:integer => '1234'}
These are just some random thoughts not criticisms.
Well done for contributing to the Parslet ecosystem!
I look forward to seeing how this project progresses.
---
"Man, I'm going to have so many chickens when this lot hatch!"
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Nigel Thorne <[email protected]> wrote:
> Nice idea.. thanks for sharing.
>
> ---
> "Man, I'm going to have so many chickens when this lot hatch!"
>
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 6:07 AM, Marcel Otto <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> first I'd like to say thanks for the awesome Parslet.
>>
>> Since this might be of interest for one or the other of you, I'd like to
>> announce here the release of Parspec, a gUnit-like specification language
>> for Parslet parsers and transformers, which translates to RSpec. Of course
>> it is written with Parslet itself.
>>
>> https://github.com/marcelotto/parspec
>>
>> Regards,
>> Marcel
>>
>
