| Related articles |
|---|
| Using gcc's parser for Y2k work lynn@swcp.com (1997-08-28) |
| Re: Using gcc's parser for Y2k work danwang@dynamic.CS.Princeton.EDU (Daniel Wang) (1997-08-30) |
| Re: Using gcc's parser for Y2k work jlilley@empathy.com (John Lilley) (1997-08-30) |
| Re: Using gcc's parser for Y2k work jlilley@empathy.com (John Lilley) (1997-09-03) |
| Re: Using gcc's parser for Y2k work dweise@microsoft.com (Daniel Weise) (1997-09-07) |
| From: | Daniel Wang <danwang@dynamic.CS.Princeton.EDU> |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | 30 Aug 1997 00:48:47 -0400 |
| Organization: | Princeton University Department of Computer Science |
| References: | 97-08-077 |
| Keywords: | C |
lynn@swcp.com (Lynn Wilson) writes:
> Is this a resonable way to go? Would standalone lex/yacc (flex/bison)
> approaches be a better way? I'm concerned that some of the publicly
> available grammars for c/c++ are not complete.
>
> Ideas and suggestions welcomed.
Take a peek at
http://www.research.microsoft.com/research/analysts/ast.htm
I haven't actually used it myself, just knows it exists and sounds like
its exactly what you're looking for.
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.