Hi! -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > Datum: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 10:40:32 +0200 > Von: "Thomas N." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > An: [email protected] > Betreff: Re: [argouml-dev] Re: ANTLR java.g (was JavaRecognizer)
> Hi Luis! > > > Does ANTLR 3 use a different package? If not I think this will be > > difficult, since, AFAIK, the classloader is the same for ArgoUML core > > and the remaining modules. > > The Antlr jar file antlrall.jar need to be replaced. Since it belongs to > the core of ArgoUML and other modules depend on it, it must stay. So, there > must be found a way for the new Antlr 3 based Java import, to use it's own > Antlr jar instead of the existing one, both for the build and at runtime. > (Later, there could be an approach to move Antlr away from the core.) > I'd definitely need help here! Fork in CVS/SVN? Otherwise you would have to rename the methods in Antlr. Not so easy, if you want to update the Antlr stuff regularly... > > Also, will we get an update of the classfile reveng grammar? It would be > > nice if that would be updated also to keep consistency amongst the java > > reveng functionality. > > I have not planned to do so, as I'm not familiar with that grammar. > Andreas, you contributed it, would this be difficult? Can you give me a hint > so > that I could deal with it? Depends on the modifications, you want to do. Antlr 3 shouldn't pose a big problem. Or has the Java bytecode changed? That's a bigger problem, since you have to study the entire bytecode specs, and back then, when I wrote the grammar, it was not very well documented (had to read a lot between the lines and study some compiled code). --<snip>-- > > But, I may give it a try after finishing the work I'm doing in the > > profile subsystem. > > The problem here is, that there is no C++ grammar for Antlr 3 so far, I > think. For Java I found one, so my (nontrivial) task is to put the ArgoUML > code into it. For the C++ grammar the approach could be different: change the > current C++ grammar with ArgoUML code in it so that it could be processed > by Antlr 3. Requires deeper Antlr knowledge, and the result would not be a > Antlr 3 optimizes grammar. > > My suggestion: For C++, stay with Antlr 2.7.7 (unless someone comes up > with a C++ grammar newly written for Antlr 3), and let us benefit from it by > setting up a working enwironment with both Java and C++ import based on two > different Parser generators! Would be a nice showcase to prove that ArgoUML > import functionality is independent from a certain parser generator. Problem is, that we need C++ support. Just yesterday, Jan posted some comments on the CRRC list, about problems with Argo. And those folks won't be happy with Argo unless they have a good C++ plus, I guess. Just like some companies etc. I would like to have more feedback from the users on their needs etc, that's why I like the idea of the Argo user website so much. It would be cool, if some OSS projects (that use Argo) would have a contact person, that reports experiences with Argo etc. and would be willing to answer questions from the Argo folks, helps them with testing etc. Ciao, Andreas -- Psst! Geheimtipp: Online Games kostenlos spielen bei den GMX Free Games! http://games.entertainment.gmx.net/de/entertainment/games/free --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
