On 2/21/08, David Gerard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 1. Wikitext is literally defined as "whatever the present software > does." This is bad.
- unless whatever the present software does is wrong. > 2. There have been several attempts to write a grammar. The latest one > is looking promising for completeness (though ANTLR is slow and > buggy). - If I said that, I think I was wrong. ANTLRworks is slow and buggy. I think ANTLR itself is probably ok, particularly once the grammar itself is stabilised. It would be good to have something to benchmark against though - does mediawiki report how long it takes to *parse* a page? > 3. A replacement grammar can be used for third-party implementations > (WYSIWYG, XML, etc) with perfect fidelity. Right. > 4. Any replacement grammar will only replace the present > implementation if it (a) covers present behaviour sufficiently (b) is > fast enough. Grammars don't replace parsers. Parsers replace parsers. There's a big gap between what I've done so far (write a grammar) and what is needed (write a parser and XHTML generator). > Current status of ANTLR-based parser: somewhere between promising > vapourware and unreleased early alpha. If you mean "parser" then definitely vapourware. If you mean "grammar" then, yes, early alpha. Steve _______________________________________________ Wikitext-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitext-l
