- Feature Name: grammar
- Start Date: 2015-10-21
- RFC PR: rust-lang/rfcs#1331
- Rust Issue: rust-lang/rust#30942
Grammar of the Rust language should not be rustc implementation-defined. We have a formal grammar at src/grammar which is to be used as the canonical and formal representation of the Rust language.
In many RFCs proposing syntactic changes (#1228, #1219 and #1192 being some of more recently merged RFCs) the changes are described rather informally and are hard to both implement and discuss which also leads to discussions containing a lot of guess-work.
Making src/grammar to be the canonical grammar and demanding for description of syntactic changes to be presented in terms of changes to the formal grammar should greatly simplify both the discussion and implementation of the RFCs. Using a formal grammar also allows us to discover and rule out existence of various issues with the grammar changes (e.g. grammar ambiguities) during design phase rather than implementation phase or, even worse, after the stabilisation.
Sadly, the grammar in question is not quite equivalent to the implementation in rustc yet. We cannot possibly hope to catch all the quirks in the rustc parser implementation, therefore something else needs to be done.
This RFC proposes following approach to making src/grammar the canonical Rust language grammar:
- Fix the already known discrepancies between implementation and src/grammar;
- Make src/grammar a semi-canonical grammar;
- After a period of time transition src/grammar to a fully-canonical grammar.
Once all known discrepancies between the src/grammar and rustc parser implementation are resolved, src/grammar enters the state of being semi-canonical grammar of the Rust language.
Semi-canonical means that all new development involving syntax changes are made and discussed in terms of changes to the src/grammar and src/grammar is in general regarded to as the canonical grammar except when new discrepancies are discovered. These discrepancies must be swiftly resolved, but resolution will depend on what kind of discrepancy it is:
- For syntax changes/additions introduced after src/grammar gained the semi-canonical state, the src/grammar is canonical;
- For syntax that was present before src/grammar gained the semi-canonical state, in most cases the implementation is canonical.
This process is sure to become ambiguous over time as syntax is increasingly adjusted (it is harder to “blame” syntax changes compared to syntax additions), therefore the resolution process of discrepancies will also depend more on a decision from the Rust team.
After some time passes, src/grammar will transition to the state of fully canonical grammar. After src/grammar transitions into this state, for any discovered discrepancies the rustc parser implementation must be adjusted to match the src/grammar, unless decided otherwise by the RFC process.
RFC process changes for syntactic changes and additions
Once the src/grammar enters semi-canonical state, all RFCs must describe syntax additions and changes in terms of the formal src/grammar. Discussion about these changes are also expected (but not necessarily will) to become more formal and easier to follow.
This RFC introduces a period of ambiguity during which neither implementation nor src/grammar are truly canonical representation of the Rust language. This will be less of an issue over time as discrepancies are resolved, but its an issue nevertheless.
One alternative would be to immediately make src/grammar a fully-canonical grammar of the Rust language at some arbitrary point in the future.
Another alternative is to simply forget idea of having a formal grammar be the canonical grammar of the Rust language.
How much time should pass between src/grammar becoming semi-canonical and fully-canonical?