and btw, this kind of threads belongs to pharo-dev, not to pharo-users :) Esteban
> On 12 Aug 2017, at 16:35, Esteban Lorenzano <esteba...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> On 12 Aug 2017, at 12:46, Tudor Girba <tu...@tudorgirba.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I would very much like this path. What would constitute tiny? > > no idea, we need to think on it :) > but I see no point in create a new (even small) parser/scanner each time we > need one. At the end you have several small parsers that repeat always same > process when PetitParser is good for most of our problems (and if you need to > improve it. you can always load PP compiler, etc.). > > Esteban > >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> >>> On Aug 11, 2017, at 9:10 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <esteba...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> hi, >>> >>>> On 11 Aug 2017, at 18:57, Cyril Ferlicot D. <cyril.ferli...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Another step would be to get a minimal parser not relying on >>>> PetitParser. >>> >>> Let’s think differently: why not to include a tiny PetitParser? >>> Then we can think on: >>> >>> - pillar sintax (better than just a restricted version) >>> - simplify other “small parsers” that are already on the image. >>> - we provide a tool to o cool stuff (instead relying as always in regexp, >>> etc.) >>> >>> cheers, >>> Esteban >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> www.feenk.com >> >> "Beauty is where we see it." >> >> >> >> >> >
