Hi, On Thu, 2005-03-03 at 19:34 +0100, Roman Kennke wrote: > When I have this ready, I will include both > the antlr sources and the generated .java files in the classpath source > tree, so that we have no additional dependency. The question here is, is > it necessary that the generated .java files are formatted and commented > just like normal source files? This can easily become a maintainence > nightmare... What are your opinions?
I am a bit afraid of the use of various/different parser generators for the core classes. If at all possible we should use the same one for all parsers. For gnu/xml/xpath/XPathParser.y we are currently using jay it is written in C and so is less of a bootstrap issue. (It is also used by mono btw). For gjdoc we are using antlr, but that can be build after all core classes have been build so there is less of a bootstrap problem. If we check in generated source code (which is really discouraged) there must be a configure option to generate the files from their source. See the --with-jay option or --enable-regen-headers for an examples. (This last one can be removed when gcjh 4.0 is in more wide use, but is currently needed since there is no released version of gjch or another header generator that can correctly generate jni headers for all our native files.) It would be nice if the parser generator added the comments of the grammar definition to the generated file. Cheers, Mark
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Classpath mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
