mikesamuel at gmail.com
Tue Jan 31 16:06:38 PST 2012
2012/1/31 Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at wirfs-brock.com>:
> On Jan 31, 2012, at 2:36 PM, Waldemar Horwat wrote:
>> On 01/28/2012 02:54 PM, Erik Arvidsson wrote:
>>> Under the open issues for Quasi Literals,
>>> http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:quasis#nesting , the
>>> topic of nesting is brought up.
>>> After implementing Quasi Literals in Traceur it is clear that
>>> supporting nested quasi literals is easier than not supporting them.
>>> What is the argument for not supporting nesting? Can we resolve this?
>> This has been hashed out in committee before. Do you have a solution to the grammar problems, such as having a full ECMAScript parser inside the lexer? You can't just count parentheses because that breaks regexps.
> I would think the solution to this is pretty straightforward. Basically, a Quasi is not a single token. the grammar in the proposal can almost be read that way right now. It should only take a little cleanup to factor it into a pure lexical part and a syntactic part. A few [no whitespace here] tokens will probably be needed
I addressed this at
More information about the es-discuss