Hey Ter, New name sounds good to me to distinguish. Yes it will break things, but well if you go to v4 that can be expected anyway - as it's a major release. =)
Martijn On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Terence Parr <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi. I'm working on the v4 runtime and, since I have introduced a formal > notion of the parse tree, some naming changes seem reasonable. I created > interface Tree, which is generic. Then I introduced ParseTree. "Tree" is such > a generic term and might conflict with ParseTree I've changed the abstract > syntax tree stuff back to AST (like in v2). Here is the complete hierarchy: > > > > > So CommonTree in v3 becomes CommonAST in v4. I don't like gratuitous breaking > changes. I could leave an alias for CommonTree (subclass CommonAST), but it > would not be a perfect replacement due to type compatibility. > > Q: is it better to leave CommonTree as CommonTree for backward compatibility > or is it better to use CommonAST in order to make it more clear we are > distinguishing between parse trees and abstract syntax tree? > > A name change also requires changes in the tree adapter stuff... that has to > become ASTAdaptor, CommonASTAdaptor... more breaking changes at the type name > level...grrr... > > Thanks, > Ter > > 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.
