Re: csh grammar?

"Kevin Szabo" <kszabo@nortelnetworks.com>
23 Jul 2000 16:55:16 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
csh grammar? davet72@home.com (Dave Thomas) (2000-07-18)
Re: csh grammar? kszabo@nortelnetworks.com (Kevin Szabo) (2000-07-23)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "Kevin Szabo" <kszabo@nortelnetworks.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 23 Jul 2000 16:55:16 -0400
Organization: Nortel Networks (Ottawa, Ontario, Canada)
References: 00-07-020
Keywords: parse, comment

Dave Thomas <davet72@home.com> wrote:
|I'm writing a script interpreter based on the UNIX csh. It would really
|save me some time if someone has the grammar. A bonus would be if
|someone has token transistion tables and state tables.


I'd recommend avoiding the CSH. It may have a reasonable grammar (I
haven't looked at it), but the semantics behind the CSH are irregular
at best and defective in many cases.


You would be better off emulating the SH KSH or BASH languages.


I was also wondering why you need the token and state tables? Don't
you use YACC to get those? (honest question, I've always either
built languages using YACC or written recursive descent).


Cheers,
Kevin
[Actually, if it were my job to write a script interpreter, I'd use tcl
and refrain from reinventing the wheel. -John]

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.