On Sul, 2004-08-01 at 00:59, David Boyes wrote: > On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 11:50:23AM +0530, Maneesh Menon wrote: > > I meant Lex and Yacc > > Better look at the complexity of the language first. The LLR grammar > for COBOL is *not* trivial. You'd also still need to write the code > generator; also non-trivial.
COBOL is easy to parse. Horrible to read and digest but easy to parse, at least up to Cobol-85. Cobol 2000 specifications are best printed out and read from at drunken computing parties - it really is that comical. I'm told that the Babelfished German translation is particularly good for this. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
