gh-118235: Skip RAISE_SYNTAX_ERROR rules in the grammar spec

[encukou]

I'm not too comfortable with regular expressions, and this looks like piling on another hack, but this highlighter rule strips all the current RAISE_SYNTAX_ERROR alternatives:

A diff of the rendered page:

@@ -498,9 +498,7 @@
 
 type_param:
     | NAME [type_param_bound] 
-    | '*' NAME ':' expression 
     | '*' NAME 
-    | '**' NAME ':' expression 
     | '**' NAME 
 
 type_param_bound: ':' expression 
@@ -771,7 +769,6 @@
 for_if_clause:
     | 'async' 'for' star_targets 'in' ~ disjunction ('if' disjunction )* 
     | 'for' star_targets 'in' ~ disjunction ('if' disjunction )* 
-    | 'async'? 'for' (bitwise_or (',' bitwise_or)* [',']) !'in' 
 
 listcomp:
     | '[' named_expression for_if_clauses ']' 
@@ -802,7 +799,6 @@
 
 starred_expression:
     | '*' expression 
-    | '*' 
 
 kwarg_or_starred:
     | NAME '=' expression 

• Issue: Full Grammar specification lists invalid syntax #118235

---

📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cpython-previews--118237.org.readthedocs.build/

[pablogsal]

Another alternative it's to move all these rules to be inside an invalid_ rule and in general prevent by review or automation rules that have RAISE_SYNTAX_ERROR in the actions.

[encukou]

Thanks for the suggestion, I'll look into that!

I'm limiting the time I spend on grammar-in-docs; with beta1 and PyCon US coming up it might be a month before my next post here.

[pablogsal]

Thanks for the suggestion, I'll look into that!

In any case I think meanwhile this is not a bad temporary solution, so let's merge it for now but let's keep an eye on the better one 👍

[miss-islington-app]

Thanks @encukou for the PR 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.12.
🐍🍒⛏🤖

[bedevere-app]

GH-118309 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.12 branch.