On 10/06/11 at 12:41pm, Anders Nygren wrote:
> Hi
> Just for fun I made a RFC4180 parser using the ABNF in the RFC.
>
> Compile rfc4180.abnf using abnfc
>
> abnfc -binary rfc4180.abnf
>
> And You get a working csv parser.
> There are some things in the textual description in the RFC that is
> not reflected
> in the abnf, e.g. if the file has a header row or not, and the
> generated parser does not
> check that all rows has the same number of fields.

Anders thanks. I will take a look at getting this rolled into
erfc_parsers this weekend. Considering that abnf is an erlang system
it might be interesting to roll it into sinan as a plugin. I may
actually do that sometime in the next week or so.



> /Anders
>
> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Anders Nygren <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Eric Merritt <[email protected]> 
> > wrote:
> >> On 10/05/11 at 11:48am, Anders Nygren wrote:
> >>> Eric
> >>> In case You are not already aware of it, I would like to point You to
> >>> my ABNF parser
> >>> generator, abnfc, (most RFCs are specified using ABNF)
> >>
> >> I wasn't aware of it at all. Thats good to know. I probably will not
> >> go back and rewrite the existing stuff. However, I will absolutely
> >> keep it in mind for the future.
> >>
> >>> https://github.com/nygge/abnfc
> >>>
> >>> The documentation is nonexistent, but it was presented at EUC 2008
> >>>
> >>> http://www.erlang.org/euc/08/1500Nygren2.pdf
> >>>
> >>> There has been some changes after that, so contact me if You have any
> >>> questions/problems.
> >>>
> >>> In general I am not sure it is a good idea to put all RFC parsers in one 
> >>> erlang
> >>> application. Since after a while You may get a large number of unrelated
> >>> stuff.
> >>
> >> I am always on the fence about this. I am not a big fan of 1 erlang
> >> file OTP apps, though there is nothing intrinsically wrong with
> >> that. I try to group modules in some reasonable way. In this case, I
> >> think that the fact that this is a library application (ie static)
> >> implies that there is no system overhead in having all the RFCs
> >> there. Though as you say there maybe some conceptual overhead.
> >>
> >
> > Thinking a little more about this, it is not so bad, since with reltool
> > it is fairly simple to specify which modules to include from an application
> > when creating a release.
> >
> > /Anders
> >
> >>
> >>> But on the other hand many RFCs imports parts of other RFCs so I do
> >>> not have any good ideas on how to structure it.
> >>
> >> Right now its just going be structured by name. for example each RFC
> >> implementation will be named erfc_<rfc number>.erl. For example, 8120
> >> would be named erfc_8120.erl. etc.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Maybe the best is just to make a big bag of parsers and let people pick 
> >>> the ones
> >>> they need.
> >>
> >> That is exactly the current plan. :)
> >>
> >> Thanks Anders, your input is always rock solid.
> >>>
> >>> /Anders
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Eric Merritt <[email protected]> 
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > Hello All,
> >>> >
> >>> > I have started an RFC parsing library in support of my latest
> >>> > endeavor. This seems like a target to put under erlware. I thought I
> >>> > would float the idea to the list.
> >>> >
> >>> > https://github.com/ericbmerritt/erfc_parsers
> >>> >
> >>> > I dont have a specific goal of implementing all RFCs but as I need
> >>> > them (RFC 821 should show up shortly) I will add them.
> >>> >
> >>> > What does everone think of putting them under erlware?
> >>> >
> >>> > Eric
> >>> >
> >>> > --
> >>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> >>> > Groups "erlware-dev" 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/erlware-dev?hl=en.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> >>> "erlware-dev" 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/erlware-dev?hl=en.
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> >> "erlware-dev" 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/erlware-dev?hl=en.
> >>
> >>
> >
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "erlware-dev" 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/erlware-dev?hl=en.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"erlware-dev" 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/erlware-dev?hl=en.

Reply via email to