"Bernard Helyer" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > Is this capable of handling D's grammar?
Not yet, unfortunately[1] :( LALR(1) can admittedly be somewhat limiting, I need to take it to something like LALR(k) or GLR (I have another idea up my sleeve, too...). It is capable of tokenizing D though, and such a grammar for that is included (lang/dlex.grm). Although, until I add support for the GOLD v5 features, nested comments have to be handled semi-manually - ie, go through the lexer's resulting token array, if you find a '/+' token then skip to the appropriately matching '+/' token. Should be easy, but of course it'd be better to not even have to bother. I need to prioritize that stuff. That is the #1 most-asked question (...hmm...you'd think I'd have my #1 most asked question in the FAQ, but I don't ATM...) [1] CS theory says that you probably could, but the resulting grammar wouldn't be very useful.
