Do this with source code control. I create a clean unadorned grammar (other than if I have no choice but to have semantic action code) as the base point for everything and always change that. Then I integrate (using perforce terminology) to all my other specific use targets.
Generally, I do nothing in the parser but produce an AST and if feasible, build a symbol table(s). Then I do everything using tree walking - I recommend this approach generally and in many cases it is all you can do because only multiple tree walks distinguish what you parsed (such as C++ for instance). There are some applications where the info you want from the parser is available as you go and trivial to gather, but personally I would still use an AST walk because requirements have a habit of becoming more complicated overtime. Jim > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:antlr-interest- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Stanley Steel > Sent: Friday, August 13, 2010 11:54 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [antlr-interest] Code Hooks > > Is there a way to specify code hooks for @init and @after. I would like to > keep my spec clean and not pollute it with code specific to a particular usage. > Does anybody else verify scope in the tree parser instead of the regular > parser? > > List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest > Unsubscribe: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your- > email-address List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest Unsubscribe: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "il-antlr-interest" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/il-antlr-interest?hl=en.
