I'm not sure this approach is going to work for Racket. Being able to run `read` when the input is malformed is going to only get you so far, as the macro expansion seems unlikely to work and this is a point of extension for programers using Racket.
Maybe a better approach would be to help DrRacket be better at keeping information from the last time the expansion was successful and apply that information to a program that has been edited since then? Robby On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 8:53 AM nicobao <n.gimene...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi! > > The Racket Reader and the Racket Expander always return "Error : blabla" > when you send it a bad Racket source code. > As a consequence, when there is a source code error, DrRacket and the > Racket LSP cannot provide IDE functionalities like "find references", "info > on hover", "find definition"...etc. > This is an issue, because 99% of the time one write code, the code is > incorrect. Other languages (Rust, Typescript/JS, Java, OCaml...etc) rely on > an incremental parser than can provide a tree even if the source code is > wrong. Basically it adds an "ERROR" node in the tree, and go on instead of > stopping everything and returning at the first error. > Currently this compiler issue is blocking the Racket IDE to provide better > user experience. > For my practical use case of Racket, it is important. > > I would like to help working towards that direction. > I see two possible solutions to that: > 1) improve the recursive descent parser of the Reader, as well as the > Expander to make them incremental and fault-tolerant > 2) re-writing the parser in something like tree-sitter or Menhir, at the > cost of having to re-write the Reader/Expander logic (!!!) > > Both solutions are daunting tasks. > > For solution 1), could you point me to the Racket's recursive descent > parser source code? What about the Expander ? > > For solution 2), I was thinking of writing a tree-sitter grammar for > racket. However, I can't find a formal description of the grammar, like > Scheme did here: > https://www.scheme.com/tspl4/grammar.html#APPENDIXFORMALSYNTAX > Of course, the Racket documentation is still quite comprehensive, but it > would be nice if anyone could tell me if there is such formal document > somewhere? > Besides, I wonder whether Racket/Scheme could even be described using a > LR(1) or a GLR grammar? > > Finally, is any work have been started towards this direction? > > Totally off-topic, but has anyone ever thought of compiling Racket down to > OCaml, in order to reuse js_of_ocaml and produce optimized JS code from > Racket? > I was wondering whether it would be feasible. > > Final note: I know all of that is _very_ ambitious! > > Kind regards, > Nicolas > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Racket Users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/d77440e3-1876-44e5-b52b-323d5715df66n%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/d77440e3-1876-44e5-b52b-323d5715df66n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/CAL3TdOOB-8qUncNcRz_NFqvQVEK5rT5jeRY8jfq1W6mN2h40eg%40mail.gmail.com.
