Hi,
I am new to ANTLR, using it to create a DSL. So far I've been able to write
a parser grammar, a tree grammar & string template file. Its all working as
I expect.
But I have a niggling feeling that I may not be using the tree grammar & stg
in an idiomatic manner. I'll ask my question using an example, suppose the
tree grammar has rules a, b, c:
options {
...
output=template;
}
a :
// ...
-> template( .. )
b : returns [ int x, int y ]
// only return no string template
c : b (as+=a)+
-> c(x={$b.x}, y={$b.y}, as={$as})
This works fine, but is it an "correct" way? In the generated code the type
of $b is b_return while the type of $as is List(containing StringTemplate
objects).
Now suppose I have a rule like:
d : a (bs+=b)+
-> d(a={$a}, bs={$bs})
This doesn't work, as the type of $bs is List containing StringTemplate
objects, but not b_return objects. Since I haven't defined a StringTemplate
for b, this doesn't work.
Maybe this is the right thing to do, i.e., in rule c type of $b is b_return,
whereas in rule d type of $bs is List(containing StringTemplates as opposed
to b_returns). But then how I communicate the structure of b (i.e. x, y) to
d ? One way is maintaining a global memory for this. Is there any other way?
How would you guys tackle this issue.
Thanks!
Sanchay
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.
