ariadne VS pom

To complement, Nushell's error rendering is done with miette (whose name is a reference to this cute meme AFAIK). There is also another notable Rust error rendering lib: ariadne. So you can get the same beautiful error rendering in your own projects :D

Hey gophers, I'm looking for something like this https://github.com/zesterer/ariadne for my compiler project, can u suggest any pkgs?

I'm looking for something similar to this rust crate https://github.com/zesterer/ariadne, but I can't find anything. I'm just starting to play with go and I really don't know where to look.

Because of that, we made a new modern error message system for Otterkit, which should still display useful information to experienced developers, while also being easy to read and understand for new developers. This new format was inspired by Rust's error messages, and both the Errata NuGet package and Ariadne Rust crate.

i really like chumsky for parsing (and it works very well with it's sister crate ariadne)

I've also been looking into https://github.com/zesterer/ariadne as I'm building a static compiler using Jinja and want to return nicer messages when there is a parsing issue.

If you’d like to see some examples of great error messages written by a language with a parser combinator, I recommend you check out tao, which is parsed via chumsky, and provides rust-like error messages with the help of ariadne! I have been fiddling with writing my own language for a while now, and after trying out the alternatives, I found Chumsky to be great to work with, and can not recommend it enough. There are also great examples that you can find in the repo as well!

The major thing I'm going to do is support nicer error messages like in https://github.com/zesterer/ariadne. Then add support for language server (LSP) and shoe them interactively on editors.

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.