In reply to Stefan Seefeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>Rodolphe Ortalo wrote:
>
>> CWEB ? Hmmm, still some Knuth-ian influence at Stanford ? ;-)))
>
>:)
no, but it could well be! i met personally with him once (which is
quite impossible nowadays), he gave me his mmix book and later on i
collected a check from him. but i used cweb before that. the problem i
see with it is that it is not modular enough.
>well, I think for terminals a full fledged parser framework is a bit
>heavyweight, don't you think ? Each parser has a simple grammer to
>know about, so I think a simple table or even regex based one would
>be ok. (Each concrete parser could use its own method, all that is
>necessary is that all parsers provide a unified abstract interface to
>the stream, or vice versa).
personally, i never encountered a problem where i needed anything like
lex/yacc. once i write out the syntax, everything goes on pretty
easily. i even wrote a complete optimization tool in which the input
was an algebraic description of the problem. writing the parsing
directly in c++ was much easier than defining the language in lex/yacc
and the actions in c++. i once read a review somewhere that lex/yacc
was actually something bad for 99% of the programs that used it.
>I'm asking since I started a source code analysis tool
>(http://Synopsis.sourceforge.net) and I'm looking into openC++ as a
>C++ parser front end, but I'm only partly successful.
strangely enough i started writing a `generic literate programming
tool' a while ago. it was called `litter' and had support for modular
parsers and formatters (sounds a ring? it looked just like your new
project!). i remember writing a parser for c from scratch, and it
wasn't difficult at all. c++ should be a little more complicated, but
not that much. unfortunately, i "rm -f litter" one day when i thought
i would never have time to finish it. but i *positively know* that
there's a lex/yacc source floating around for the C syntax.
>My main goal with Synopsis is to produce documentation, but even
>source code navigation tools should be possible...
sounds great. will it support web-like stuff?
--
Cesar Augusto Rorato Crusius __o __o __o __o __o
Stanford University _`\<, _`\<, _`\<, _`\<, _`\<,
e-mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (_)/(_) (_)/(_) (_)/(_) (_)/(_) (_)/(_)
www.stanford.edu/~crusius
o _ _ _
__o __o __o __o /\_ _ \\o (_)\__/o (_)
_`\<, _`\<, _`\<, _`\<, _>(_) (_)/<_ \_| \ _|/' \/
(_)/(_) (_)/(_) (_)/(_) (_)/(_) (_) (_) (_) (_)' _\o_
He who sacrifices functionality for ease of use
Loses both and deserves neither
