This patch allows Parser to generate a refined token stream to satisfy tooling's need. For syntax coloring, token stream from lexer is insufficient because (1) we have contextual keywords like get and set; (2) we may allow keywords to be used as argument labels and names; and (3) we need to split tokens like "==<". In this patch, these refinements are directly fulfilled through parsing without additional heuristics. The refined token vector is optionally saved in SourceFile instance.
This patch will allow for serialization of RawSyntax trees to JSON,
which allows external tools to get access to a RawSyntax tree.
This also adds a hook into swift-syntax-test to generate JSON for a
given Swift source file, which will be used in tests in subsequent
commits.
* [Parse] Refactored internal structure of Tokens.def and documented usage.
Added a level of structure to the macro definitions to allow Swift
keywords to be cleanly accessed separately from SIL and Swift keywords
together. Documented structure and usage.
* [Parse] Made use of new guarantees and abstractions in Tokens.def
Used guarantees about undefining macros after import and new
SWIFT_KEYWORD abstraction to simplify usage of the Token.def
imports.
* Gardening
This introduces a few unfortunate things because the syntax is awkward.
In particular, the period and following token in \.[a], \.? and \.! are
token sequences that don't appear anywhere else in Swift, and so need
special handling. This is somewhat compounded by \foo.bar.baz possibly
being \(foo).bar.baz or \(foo.bar).baz (parens around the type), and,
furthermore, needing to distinguish \Foo?.bar from \Foo.?bar.
rdar://problem/31724243
Add an option to the lexer to go back and get a list of "full"
tokens, which include their leading and trailing trivia, which
we can index into from SourceLocs in the current AST.
This starts the Syntax sublibrary, which will support structured
editing APIs. Some skeleton support and basic implementations are
in place for types and generics in the grammar. Yes, it's slightly
redundant with what we have right now. lib/AST conflates syntax
and semantics in the same place(s); this is a first step in changing
that to separate the two concepts for clarity and also to get closer
to incremental parsing and type-checking. The goal is to eventually
extract all of the syntactic information from lib/AST and change that
to be more of a semantic/symbolic model.
Stub out a Semantics manager. This ought to eventually be used as a hub
for encapsulating lazily computed semantic information for syntax nodes.
For the time being, it can serve as a temporary place for mapping from
Syntax nodes to semantically full lib/AST nodes.
This is still in a molten state - don't get too close, wear appropriate
proximity suits, etc.
