Clean slate with Winnow #61
Draft
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This is no longer necessary because the entire input is lowercased
|
Looks good, I haven't checked all rules but it is much cleaner then my earlier draft. |
| } | ||
|
|
||
| /// Parse a timezone starting with `+` or `-` | ||
| fn timezone(input: &mut &str) -> PResult<Offset> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this be renamed to offset? Since an offset technically isn't a timezone.
|
needs rebasing |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I'm trying to rewrite this from scratch using Winnow, because it's broken in too many places.
Basically, I'm writing this from first principles (the GNU docs). I'm starting with the several types of items and I'm not even doing any datetime manipulation yet, just parsing the items, with proper tests based on experimentation and the docs. I'm not using any regexes either, because they are slow and unwieldy compared to Winnow.
This will mean that this library can finally be properly structured and implemented with the same parsing rules as GNU, because we have full control over the parsing now.
There's a lot of similarity with #25, but this is using Winnow instead of Nom, which is a fork of Nom by Ed Page and quite a bit nicer. This PR also does not use macros for testing, making it a bit easier to review in my opinion. I have not yet compared these in depth, it seems that I've made a very similar structure to what @wanderinglethe did.
@wanderinglethe feel free to also give your opinion on this.
I intend to to just grow this PR and merge it all at once. I will try to port over all the test cases that we already pass.