pom VS chumsky

pom

Maybe a parser combinator library is not what you want? One alternative might be writing an expression parser without a library at all: https://matklad.github.io/2020/04/13/simple-but-powerful-pratt-parsing.html (Depending on the grammar you are parsing a Pratt parser might actually be a good fit!) A PEG might also be more suitable for your use case, like pom.

I saw the performance comparison against pom, pom is unfortunately quite slow compared to an handwritten parser as it boxes most (all?) parsers so you may want to compare against a handwritten parser, or at least something in the same ballpark (for reference, combine's json benchmark on the same data is about 6x faster with "good errors", when optimized to work on &str-like input it is about 12x faster, nom or a hand written parser may be another 10-20% faster than that, if I remember correctly.) From a brief skim of the code, I don't see anything that would hinder it from at least closing that gap however.

Everyone on this sub seems to be using nom. In my experience I find pom to be intuitive and have to write less code. Maybe it's just me I'm having a hard time understanding nom which has a lot of function calls rather than less.If you compare both the json examples on both projects, the pom example is a lot clearer to read and a lot shorter.

I attempted to use this but was disheartened but the fact that it doesn't statically type node names. Tree Sitter doesn't either but it has much more of an excuse given that it targets C.

https://github.com/lezer-parser/lezer/issues/8

The dev seems mildly hostile to outside involvement too, so I moved on. These days I use Chumsky which is Rust rather than Typescript, but also way more awesome, if you can deal with the often incomprehensible compilation errors at least!

https://github.com/zesterer/chumsky

there’s also chumsky: https://github.com/zesterer/chumsky

We are using technique called parser combinator. And we are using a library chumsky to write parser combinators.

rust-langdev has a lot of libraries for building compilers in Rust. Perhaps you could use these to make your implementation easier, and revisit it later if you want to build things from scratch. I'd suggest logos for lexing, LALRPOP / chumsky for parsing, and rust-gc for garbage collection.

The examples that come with chumsky and the chumsky tutorial and guide all define their parsers using closures.

Parser: https://crates.io/crates/chumsky

chumsky's zero-copy rewrite has reached its first alpha release, and I have migrated my pep-508 parser to it, as suggested in my last announcement.

On my side, nom is still advancing well and a new major version is in preparation, with some interesting work a new GAT based design inspired from the awesome work on chumsky, that promises to bring great performance with complex error types. 2023 will be fun for parser libraries!

I am using chumsky because I like the API, but it doesn't support zero copy at the moment. Although efficiency is good to have, it is not my primary good. This will probably get supported once chumsky implements support for it (see upstream issue).

Checkout https://github.com/zesterer/chumsky or https://github.com/rust-bakery/nom