Am 23.06.2015 09:26, schrieb Guillaume Laforge:
Hi Jochen,
A few thoughts...
1) It sounds like a good idea to focus on one single Java parser,
instead of two.
2) I think we could get rid (completely) of the useless java2groovy
usage and tool altogether (one less place to use a Java parser)
3) I'm wondering what is going to be the most up-to-date / practical of
Antlr v4 vs QDox Java parser?
Is QDox still alive? (I notice Paul Hammant migrated QDox from Codehaus
to his Github account)
And is QDox using the latest Java 8 syntax or is it still on an older
version of the Java syntax?
Perhaps the Antlr Java parser would be more up-to-date? (and there's
usually always someone to contribute a new grammar for newer versions of
Java)
There are not many changes to qdox, yes, but on the other hand, there
are not many changes needed as well. Java 8 for example doesn't really
differ in the signatures sections from Java 5. Depending on how the
parser has been written, it may not care about lambdas and such at all.
So it is more about bug fixing.
I am pretty sure we can make a parser that will accept java as well as
groovy source files to get those signatures. I am also relatively sure
we can use the existing antlr4 groovy parser as base for this and more
or less strip it down quite a bit. That's of course only if the
java2groovy tool is really abandoned. Because that tool requires more
then just signatures and javadoc-comments.
bye blackdrag
--
Jochen "blackdrag" Theodorou
blog: http://blackdragsview.blogspot.com/
