This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2018-05-24
Channels
- # adventofcode (11)
- # architecture (12)
- # beginners (132)
- # boot (19)
- # cider (26)
- # clojure (69)
- # clojure-dusseldorf (4)
- # clojure-gamedev (1)
- # clojure-italy (46)
- # clojure-nl (4)
- # clojure-serbia (1)
- # clojure-switzerland (2)
- # clojure-uk (91)
- # clojurescript (79)
- # css (4)
- # cursive (2)
- # datomic (16)
- # docs (9)
- # duct (20)
- # editors (94)
- # fulcro (15)
- # graphql (2)
- # hoplon (1)
- # instaparse (7)
- # jobs (3)
- # lein-figwheel (3)
- # leiningen (2)
- # lumo (40)
- # mount (35)
- # off-topic (19)
- # reagent (18)
- # reitit (1)
- # shadow-cljs (123)
- # specter (7)
- # sql (5)
- # test-check (4)
- # tools-deps (38)
- # vim (20)
- # yada (9)
Hello again. I stumbled onto http://instaparse-live.matt.is/ and it's really awesome, I've been tinkering with it and with a repl-like feedback loop it's been pretty painless finding something that can parse logic like i need
But one thing I have noticed is that if there are parse variations, there may be multiple result parses
That pretty much encapsulates the nodes as I want to store them... i wonder if there is a cleaner or clearer representation for just & and | logic w/ parens
Sometimes, there are multiple valid interpretations, for example: (pardon the zoom level)...
It seems as though they are both perfectly valid so, maybe I can just use the first one of the result set
better example..