On 10 April 2010 03:37, James Paige <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 08:56:18PM +1200, Ralph Versteegen wrote: >> On 8 April 2010 04:14, James Paige <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 08:58:39PM +1200, Ralph Versteegen wrote: >> >> On 07/04/2010, Seth Hetu <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> Wrote a proper lexer for HSpeak - nearly: it still produces strings >> >> >> rather >> >> >> than lexemes since the rest of HSpeak wouldn't know what to do with >> >> >> them. >> >> > >> >> > Congratulations! May I ask what kind of lexer it is? (Recursive >> >> > descent, I'm guessing). >> >> > >> >> > -->Seth >> >> >> >> I thought recursive descent was used only for parsers, not lexers (but >> >> maybe complicated context sensitive grammars would require them)? >> >> >> >> I looked around for parser generators for Euphoria and found one, but >> >> it had an infexible lexer, so after considering writing my own lexer >> >> generator I simply hand coded it - just as well, turned out to not be >> >> much work. The lexer doesn't distinguish numbers yet, but I think I >> >> shall add that, because I think I shall upgrade HSpeak to use tokens >> >> rather than strings (which will be a huge change requiring a lot of >> >> rewriting) >> > >> > You know the hspeak code better than I, would it be worth it to try and >> > move away from euphoria entirely? >> > >> > --- >> > James >> >> I don't think Euphoria is that bad a language, and rewriting or >> porting HSpeak seems like unnecessary work. >> >> If frustrated, we could also look at switching to Euphoria 4, or even >> using one of the preprocessors or forks that add OO and so on. > > It is not a bad language, but it does cause portability problems. When > the getdeb.net people were trying to build a debian package for the > OHRRPGCE, they were pretty frustrated by Euphoria. > > I wonder if it would be reasonable for us to just check into subversion > the c files generated by Euphoria's c converter. That way we can > continue to develop it in Euphoria, no rewriting needed, but platform > packagers have the convenience of only needing a C compiler, not a > Euphoria compiler. > > --- > James
That sounds like a very good idea. They should go in a sub directory. And on the topic of sub directories, I think we need some new platform specific sub directories: the .a files currently in svn are all built with mingw, which is pretty confusing and requires some annoying workarounds: for unix users, wip/audwrap/libaudwrap.a (after being built) needs to be linked against instead of wip/libaudwrap.a. Something similar for libohrblit.a. Also, the C files generated by Euphoria are also platform specific (though I don't know whether they're the same for all unix platforms) Moving the dlls would be annoying, they are unambiguous so can stay. So wip/windows and wip/unix? _______________________________________________ Ohrrpgce mailing list [email protected] http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org
