The primary advantage of ungrammar is that it (eventually) allows one
to describe concrete syntax tree structure -- with alternatives and
specific sequence of tokens & nodes.
That should be re-usable for:
* generate `make` calls
* Rust reference
* Hypothetical parser's evented API
We loose doc comments for the time being unfortunately. I don't think
we should add support for doc comments to ungrammar -- they'll make
grammar file hard to read. We might supply docs as out-of band info,
or maybe just via a reference, but we'll think about that once things
are no longer in flux
4658: Fix problem with format string tokenization r=matklad a=ruabmbua
Fixed by just not handling closing curlybrace escaping.
Closes https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/4637
Co-authored-by: Roland Ruckerbauer <roland.rucky@gmail.com>
4083: Smol documentation for ast nodes r=matklad a=Veetaha
There is a tremendous amount of TODOs to clarify the topics I am not certain about.
Please @matklad, @edwin0cheng review carefully, I even left some mentions of your names in todos to put your attention where you most probably can give comments.
In order to simplify the review, I separated the codegen (i.e. changes in `ast/generated/nodes.rs`) from `ast_src` changes (they in fact just duplicate one another) into two commits.
Also, I had to hack a little bit to let the docs be generated as doc comments and not as doc attributes because it's easier to read them this way and IIRC we don't support hints for `#[doc = ""]` attributes for now...
Closes#3682
Co-authored-by: veetaha <veetaha2@gmail.com>
This reverts commit 7a49165f5d.
MacroStmts ast node is not used by itself, but it pertains
to SyntaxNodeKind MACRO_STMTS that is used by ra_paser, so
even tho the node itself is not used, it is better to keep it
with a FIXME to actually add a doc comment when it becomes useful.
