Proposal to rename `grammarSource` option in parse method to `source` about peggy HOT 1 OPEN

Some issues:

• Backward compatibility. We would have to accept both source and grammarSource. This makes the next point worse.
• Namespace pollution. Anyone using source for something else would have their code break, since options for peggy are mixed in with options that the user's grammar needs. If I recall correctly, we thought grammarSource was less likely to collide with existing code.

I more or less agree with you that source would be better, but I think it's too late to make the switch. What we could do is improve the documentation to make it more clear that this is the source that the grammar is operating on, not the source for the grammar.

Let's leave this issue open for suggestions for doc improvements.

from peggy.