|"Circumfix" operators email@example.com (Joachim Durchholz) (2007-09-07)|
|Re: "Circumfix" operators firstname.lastname@example.org (Jean-Marc Bourguet) (2007-09-10)|
|Re: "Circumfix" operators email@example.com (2007-09-10)|
|Re: "Circumfix" operators firstname.lastname@example.org (Jeff Kenton) (2007-09-11)|
|Re: "Circumfix" operators email@example.com (Joachim Durchholz) (2007-09-13)|
|From:||Joachim Durchholz <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Date:||Thu, 13 Sep 2007 07:45:19 +0200|
|Organization:||1&1 Internet AG|
|Posted-Date:||13 Sep 2007 13:27:16 EDT|
Jeff Kenton schrieb:
> As for if-then-else, I wouldn't add them to expression parsing unless
> they are really valid in expressions, as they were in Algol or are now
> in Xpath.
That's indeed what I'm after.
> Otherwise, I'd use a recursive descent parser for most of the
> language and switch to operator precedence parsing just for expressions.
The goal is to have an all-operators language. Well, just syntactically,
so it's really going to be an all-operator-precedence language :-)
[You know, if we want BLISS, we know where to find it. -John]
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.