This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
This is a request to include an LR grammar of WebIDL in addition to the current LL grammar. Having an LR grammar would make it easier to convert for parser generators and is more conducive to building ASTs during the parse. Thanks, Kevin
Why two ways of defining IDL fragments? That seems far worse than having just one. And it seems unlikely we will change the existing one a lot.
Anne, I was chatting with Cameron about this and he suggested I add a bug entry for it. Basically, an LR grammar is typically better suited for generating ASTs than LL grammars. My preference would be to have a single grammar, as well, and for that to be an LR grammar, but I'm biased. -Kevin
Not necessary for now, so maybe in v2.
I think this bug should be Resolved now as "Later" and considered an input for v2.
Maintaining two grammars is a bad idea, so we'd want to do a complete switch from one grammar to the other. There are now numerous consumers of the current LL(1) grammar, so we'd need buy-in from them before organizing such a move. If someone's ready to do this work, I'd suggest starting a conversation on public-script-coord@w3.org before moving this to a GitHub issue, then a pull request. In the meantime, I'll close this as wontfix.