Rename parse(::String)

[KristofferC]

I keep seeing new users (on Discourse) accidentally using e.g. parse("1") to go from a String to a literal. This is a few hundred times slower than parse(Int, "1") but in most cases, it works. I think that the function to parse source code should be named differently to avoid this. I also think it is ok if it has a slightly uglier name, e.g. parse_sourcecode just to be clear about what it does.

---

x-ref: see #24455 for the resolution.

[yuyichao]

Or Meta.parse. I really hope we don't keep making functions manipulating/inspecting source code/expressions longer and longer.......................

[JeffBezanson]

+1 for Meta.parse to go with Meta.lower.

[Keno]

parse(Expr, "1")?

[yuyichao]

parse(Expr, "1")?

A little wierd since it's not always an Expr....

[StefanKarpinski]

I really like the idea of parse(Expr, "1") but as it currently stands, it's pretty weird as @yuyichao says. Perhaps we could have a Code type that is just a union of all the types that parsing a Julia string can return and then call parse(Code, "123") for parsing Julia code. Code is a bad name, but you get the idea.

[StefanKarpinski]

@JeffBezanson prefers Meta.parse("123") which then moves it out of the immediate reach of people parsing data types which would be what the Base.parse function is for.

[JeffBezanson]

Or maybe Meta.parsecode ?

[KristofferC]

I like them having different names so you can e.g. import both.

[StefanKarpinski]

Let's just go with @JeffBezanson's suggestion.

[ararslan]

To clarify, Jeff's suggestion of Meta.parsecode