| ▲ | ArneCode 3 hours ago | |
In this case yes, but I would argue this is because the roll grammar is a relatively simple grammar, you have no nesting of different combinators etc. (I have used it in the README because it is simple to understand). The winnow code also using seperated_pair to ignore the "d" value, which is also adding some logic to retain only the count and sides result. One grammar I have been using to make a comparison is a function signature. I tried comparing with nom and chumsky: https://blog.arnedebo.com/posts/a-grammar-first-approach-to-... These libraries have found ways to replace "unwrapping" code with combinators like separated_by or .ignore_then etc. but this still leaves a lot of code for result handling, in my opinon making the code harder to read and reason about, which is what I attempt to improve. These are of course very subjective things, so another person might prefer the ways the other libraries do this. | ||