On 2023-09-02 09:10, Ihor Radchenko wrote: > Jens Schmidt <jschmidt4...@vodafonemail.de> writes:
>> This all calls for a proper parser, based on peg or bovine or whatever. >> Hopefully that parser would still keep backward compatibility, but >> that's probably wishful thinking. > > Backward compatibility will be easy - just leave the current code when > old query version is detected. We should better focus on the new syntax > in future and leave the current syntax as compatibility layer that will > be eventually deprecated. Agreed except for the deprecation part. I think Org should be big enough to have two parsers: One along the lines of the current one (infix, DWIM, easy to type) and one along the lines of org-ql (sexp, better extensible, more flexible, harder to type). Ideally, it should be even possible to embed the infix-one into the sexp-one. It should also be possible to put the current infix parser onto a more stable ground as well, based on a formal grammar, providing at least parentheses for grouping and negation, and that without breaking backward compatibility. Let's rephrase that way: If I were to redo the current parser as mentioned in the previous paragraph, would these changes "eventually be deprecated"? (Which doesn't necessarily mean that I promise to do so, of course.)
