Fork me on GitHub

@jeroenvandijk that grammar doesn't appear to be valid BNF; many of the string tokens are not properly quoted


Also, instaparse has adopted the angle brackets <> to mean "hiding tags" (not an EBNF standard) but this AWS grammar uses them in all of the rule names, which might result in weird behavior


for example

<condition_block> = "Condition" : { <condition_map> }
should be
condition_block = "Condition" ":" "{" condition_map "}"


my experience with instaparse, and other parsers for that matter, and external grammars, is pretty much no one provides complete grammars that are machine parseable.

☝️ 4

it is incredibly frustrating to find out that, for example, the only grammar for the version 3 of the protobuf type description language available is incomplete and only published as fragments in <pre> blocks on the protobuf website