More comments, and the ANTLR code is too complex
Mark H Weaver
(29 May 2013 07:04 UTC)
|
Re: More comments, and the ANTLR code is too complex David A. Wheeler (29 May 2013 17:39 UTC)
|
Re: More comments, and the ANTLR code is too complex
David A. Wheeler
(31 May 2013 17:03 UTC)
|
Re: More comments, and the ANTLR code is too complex
David A. Wheeler
(01 Jun 2013 02:27 UTC)
|
Re: More comments, and the ANTLR code is too complex
David A. Wheeler
(10 Jun 2013 00:21 UTC)
|
Re: More comments, and the ANTLR code is too complex
Alan Manuel Gloria
(10 Jun 2013 02:01 UTC)
|
Re: More comments, and the ANTLR code is too complex
David A. Wheeler
(12 Jun 2013 00:25 UTC)
|
Re: More comments, and the ANTLR code is too complex
Mark H Weaver
(12 Jun 2013 20:13 UTC)
|
Re: More comments, and the ANTLR code is too complex David A. Wheeler 29 May 2013 17:39 UTC
Mark H Weaver: > In the interest of encouraging implementors, I'd recommend making a > serious effort to rewrite the grammar to be as conceptually simple and > clear as possible. We certainly want it to be as simple and clear as possible. I'll look over your suggestions that you posted, and if you have others, I'd love to hear them. ... > * Inconsistent syntax is used within {} in the ANTLR. In most places > standard Scheme syntax is used, but in 'collecting_tail', the syntax > is more like C. The *real* ANTLR code uses Java. I used a program to translate them to Scheme, and obviously it failed in some places. I'll need to look at it. I'll reply more when I have a moment. --- David A. Wheeler