0.6.0: Support try/catch syntax

[Eriiond]

Hey,

please support parsing of the new try/catch syntax in solidity 0.6.0 (https://solidity.readthedocs.io/en/v0.6.0/control-structures.html#try-catch).

Thank you very much.

[GNSPS]

Hey @Wolf-Rost !

The ConsenSys Diligence team has just taken up maintenance of the parser. Find an updated 0.6.0 version here: https://github.com/consensys/solidity-parser-antlr

[federicobond]

@GNSPS, I would have appreciated at least a shoutout and a friendly pull-request before forking the project.

[GNSPS]

Hey @federicobond! 👋

I'm sorry that this seems to come out of the blue but I did try to reach out to you on Gitter. And looked for activity in the repo way before making the decision.

Our team has a bunch of tools dependent on the parser and sometimes we just need super responsive actions. I am happy to keep doing PRs towards this repository, though, but now that I've put in the effort to set all this up I think our team benefits greatly from having freedom of movements! 😄

Again, as I said before, happy to keep merging all changes upstream. I just thought this was getting abandoned.

[fvictorio]

Hi, we are working on a new major version of solhint and one of the changes we've done was to migrate from using https://github.com/solidityj/solidity-antlr4 directly to using solidity-parser-antlr. We found some issues while doing this (#94, #95, and others we didn't open) and so right now we are using a fork that fixes those issues. It also has the latest changes from @GNSPS's fork.

But this is just a temporal thing. Ideally we would rely on an external repo (to which we would be happy to contribute, of course). Even more ideally we would rely on this repo, or at least on a fork that has @federicobond's blessing.

I totally understand why Consensys forked the repo, I was feeling a little frustrated too. But "big company forks and renames single dev's OSS project" is not a solution I like, even if I know it wasn't the intention.

I'm not sure what the best solution is here. Maybe @federicobond is willing to give write access to us? Maybe a new repo can be created from scratch, using this codebase as a starting point? I don't know.

For the time being, I'm going to open some PRs with my changes in this repo. And I already mentioned to @GNSPS that they might want to integrate them in their fork too. Luckily at some point in the not-so-distant future everything can be merged in a single repo.