[SVN] r8631 (JavaScript)

[Thomas Aylott - subtleGradient]

On Dec 10, 2007, at 5:23 AM, Michael Sheets wrote:

> On Dec 10, 2007, at 2:42 AM, Thomas Aylott - subtleGradient wrote:
>
>> This is not the same issue as the PHP/HTML issue. Some people might  
>> prefer the simpler subset of rules that the basic Javascript syntax  
>> has. They should be sorted close to eachother because they are  
>> related and are both viable choices.
>
> This argument could be made to make two grammars of any language,  
> surely the confusion issue would arise more than the style issue?  
> Unless your planning some controversial stuff in one of them? ;)

I'm not sure I understand what you mean.
The reason to keep them sorted separately is if there is some reason  
why they should not choose one of those syntaxes. In this particular  
case it doesn't matter what they choose since they aren't losing out  
on any absolutely necessary functionality.

I didn't think I was doing anything controversial before either, so  
I'm not sure how controversial my plans are. Perhaps I should run them  
by the community before I implement anything new.

I'm mostly just planning on
	* cleaning up the scopes and making everything follow the actual  
language itself in the basic javascript.
	* The wrapper around it, the new "Javascript" syntax, will contain  
all the begin…end scopes that include $base.

> The only place I can see it mattering here is that Dreamer has  
> complained how much slower the punctuation scopes have made pastes  
> as it adds a lot of overhead to the HTML parser. Tab/space scopes  
> could easily quadruple them.

There should probably be some sort of blacklist of scopes that aren't  
converted into html.
All punctuation and whitespace scopes would be pretty useless  
converted to html I would think.

Where does the code for that sit? I may take a crack at it.

—Thomas Aylott – subtleGradient—