> Have you looked at Katahdin? He made some interesting choices there to > > support different types of recursion and precedence even while maintaining a > > (mostly; he goes for longest-match "or" instead of prioritized choice) PEG > > base. I haven't read your "supporting recursion in peg" paper yet but there > > might be connections to his choices. > > > > I have looked at Katahdin, and it does look like an interesting project. > The way he handles left-recursive rules is similar to the approach described > in our PEPM paper, although ours does not rely on explicit annotations on > left-recursive productions. The whole precedence thing (which is why he uses > longest-match choice instead of ordered choice) I'm not so happy with, but I > guess it's a matter of taste. (That, and the fact that using cascading > productions to implement operator precedence seems to be more compatible > with OMeta's notion of grammar inheritance.) >
Yes, a matter of taste but also execution time and time complexity. Memoization (did you understand from his thesis if he really imlemented memoization?) might save his execution time but it seemed a bit strange to me that he labeled it a PEG with longest-match since the prioritized choice is so integral to PEG's. My taste is similar to yours here, I guess... ;) Cheers, Robert
_______________________________________________ fonc mailing list [email protected] http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
