Merge purescript-ast into purescript-cst#4094
Merge purescript-ast into purescript-cst#4094JordanMartinez merged 11 commits intopurescript:masterfrom JordanMartinez:mergeAstIntoCst
Conversation
|
I think #4090 should be merged before this one. This one is easy to reimplement but 4090 isn't. |
|
Wouldn't it be a miscommunication to put AST and CST under the name |
|
I don't think it would be really that much worse than it is currently, since |
This does not include the release guide
|
I've updated this PR to work on top of current |
lib/purescript-cst/README.md
Outdated
| # purescript-cst | ||
|
|
||
| Defines the surface syntax of the PureScript Programming Language. | ||
| Defines the surface and underlying syntax of the PureScript Programming Language. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Now that these packages are merged, I think talking about a distinction between a "surface" and "underlying" syntax is probably unnecessary, and I suspect it won't be clear to lots of readers, and they probably don't need to care about the difference in lots of cases anyway, at least not immediately. How about "The parser for the PureScript programming language"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How about "The parser for the PureScript programming language"?
Isn't this more than just the parser? Does one ever operate directly on the AST via some tool?
I'll make the change, but I'm just expressing my confusion as to why syntax is no longer mentioned when it seems like that's what this resulting library is.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It has type definitions for the syntax, sure, but you can’t really write a parser without having those in the first place. Maybe I’m overthinking it though. I guess “defines the syntax for …” would work too.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think syntax and parser would probably work, but... 🙃 I already merged this.
We can fix it later if someone gets confused down the road.
lib/purescript-cst/README.md
Outdated
| ## Compiler compatibility | ||
|
|
||
| We provide a table to make it a bit easier to map between versions of `purescript` and `purescript-cst`. | ||
| We provide a table to make it a bit easier to map between versions of `purescript`, `purescript-cst`, and `purescript-ast`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think now is a good opportunity to put this table in reverse order, so that the latest versions (which people are more likely to care about) are at the top. Also, I think it would be nice to have a separate table following the merge of ast and cst, so that there isn't an extra column. Maybe something like this?
We provide a table to make it a bit easier to map between versions of purescript and purescript-cst.
purescript |
purescript-cst |
|---|---|
| 0.14.2 | 0.2.0.0 |
Before v0.14.2, there was a third package, purescript-ast. In v0.14.2, purescript-ast was merged into purescript-cst.
purescript |
purescript-cst |
purescript-ast |
|---|---|---|
| 0.14.1 | 0.1.1.0 | 0.1.1.0 |
| 0.14.0 | 0.1.0.0 | 0.1.0.0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like this idea!
| version: 0.1.1.0 | ||
| synopsis: PureScript Programming Language Concrete Syntax Tree | ||
| description: The surface syntax of the PureScript Programming Language. | ||
| description: The surface and underlying syntax of the PureScript Programming Language. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If we change the README according to my comment there, let's make the same change here.
|
Also, feel free to make any edits necessary to get this merged if I don't respond in time. |
3 participants
Description of the change
Fixes #4067 to make releases a bit easier.
Checklist: