>>> Yet, as far as parser goes, it is the best solution. Because it is the >>> originial source of information. Any new additions as well as >>> corrections go in there -- >>> >> This is not necessarily true. Someone might hack in support for a new >> procedure specifier. However, it is not guranteed that this one would be >> exposed in any way to an external interface. >> > But, the parser does produce a parse tree, doesn't it.
FPC doesn't produce a parse tree during compilation. The parser puts declarations/definitions immediatly into the symtables, for code an intermediate representation is created which is indeed a tree but no more a parse tree because statements might already be transformed. >>> it can also reorganize some comments in such constructs. >>> >> The compiler simply discards comments and it has no infrastructure to >> link comments in any way to code. >> > Naturally, comments are no good for the compiler --so, I am assuming > that the current parser does recognise comments but does not add them to > the parse tree; if so, it is fine, all it will have to do is to add > those nodes while the compiler still ignores them. Would that be too > difficult to add? > No idea, at least I expect a lot of pitfalls. -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
