Re: [PATCH olang v1] spec: ebnf: add binary expressions

[Johnny Richard <johnny@johnnyrichard.com>]

On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 12:33:58AM -0300, Carlos Maniero wrote:
> I'd like to get your opinion: Is it really necessary to represent
> precedence here? Some language specifications [1] chose to omit this
> detail. I' more inclined to keep the spec as simple as possible, even if
> it makes the behavior a bit unclear. I believe it's more important to
> represent our grammar in the spec rather than precisely detail how
> olang behaves. Alternatively, we could follow Go's approach; they kept
> the spec simple and added explanatory text about the language's
> behavior.
> 
> But again, I just wanna an opinion here, I'm totally OK following the
> spec you wrote, because I know that I suck at understanding the
> precedence climbing method. :-)
> 
> 
> [1]: Golang EBNF: https://go.dev/ref/spec#Expression / Rust EBNF:
> https://web.mit.edu/rust-lang_v1.25/arch/amd64_ubuntu1404/share/doc/rust/html/grammar.html#binary-operator-expressions

I think the language specification should address all gramma aspects of
the language syntax, and precedence is a very fundamental part of the
syntax.

Being clear about the precedence rules in our grammar will prove its
worth once we begin adding more features to our parser.

Changing subject, if you are happy with this change and want to
integrate it, I want to change the patch title to:

    docs: spec: add binary expressions

I will appreciate a lot if you could make this change when applying the
patch.

Thanks for your review. <3