Kat Marchán

@bgotink > The following tests that previously failed now run successfully: Looking at this... These should be dropped because they're ok now: > test name test equivalent document > `bare_ident_numeric_fail.kdl`...

uggghhhh I understand why those last 3 tests pass now. I want to do something about it, though. I don't like that. I wonder if there's a good way around...

@bgotink @tabatkins I've... kind of changed the rules a bit. They're simpler now. And most importantly: we have `0u64` available now! I checked #510 and I didn't see any discussion...

Some key changes: * I reorganized things a bit in general. * The grammar itself now blocks simultaneous suffix and prefix annotations * The underscore `_` initial character restriction was...

I'm also wondering: could we just drop the exponent restriction (but keep the `e+` protection, in case someone fails to write that digit and ends up with an unfortunate parse)

Yeah KPath (née KQL) is due for some serious work in general. Although one must wonder if a language like this should even support comments

KDL has 3 different string literals, 2 of which have multiline variants with otherwise identical syntax. Where are the other two? I'm not sure what you're getting at. I can...

ah, you split idents into different kinds. That's mostly an implementation detail, but ok.

I think the bit that matters here, and what I believe @lolbinarycat is getting at, is that since we have a certain level of complexity with strings, therefore any other...

Having a proper guide that isn't just reading a bunch of code is still of value. I started working on one a while back.