Re: Fusion Laws?
Jason Orendorff <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.mozilla.devel.jseng |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CA+W3DWHRh_BaP3vu42mCgZCjF9qFftCazK0+H_e2RvdBXgupVw@mail.gmail.com> |
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:32 PM, Michael Haufe < [email protected]> wrote: > It's a shame there isn't an Attribute Grammar definition for the semantics > of ECMAScript, it might make this a bit more tractable... > Believe it or not, the specification itself is all attribute grammars, including the parts that define Evaluation. It's not written in a real formal language, and it's a weird mash-up of declarative and procedural style, but it's close enough to attribute grammars that you can see exactly how you would go about formalizing it. The specification technique isn't the problem. It's the semantics being specified. They are the semantics of a dynamic language. Reasoning about such code is an exercise in hand-waving. -j