Re: What should be check in Lexical Analyzer along with generating tokens?

"Joachim Durchholz" <joachim_d@gmx.de>
20 Oct 2002 22:54:34 -0400

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[2 earlier articles]
Re: What should be check in Lexical Analyzer along with generating tok clint@0lsen.net (Clint Olsen) (2002-09-20)
Re: What should be check in Lexical Analyzer along with generating t joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2002-09-22)
Re: What should be check in Lexical Analyzer along with generating clint@0lsen.net (Clint Olsen) (2002-09-25)
Re: What should be check in Lexical Analyzer along with generati clint@0lsen.net (Clint Olsen) (2002-09-29)
Re: What should be check in Lexical Analyzer along with genera joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2002-10-13)
Re: What should be check in Lexical Analyzer along with generating tok lex@cc.gatech.edu (Lex Spoon) (2002-10-18)
Re: What should be check in Lexical Analyzer along with generating t joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2002-10-20)
Re: What should be check in Lexical Analyzer along with generating lars@bearnip.com (Lars Duening) (2002-10-25)
Re: What should be check in Lexical Analyzer along with generating lex@cc.gatech.edu (Lex Spoon) (2002-10-25)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "Joachim Durchholz" <joachim_d@gmx.de>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 20 Oct 2002 22:54:34 -0400
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 02-09-087 02-09-110 02-09-121 02-09-128 02-09-141 02-09-156 02-10-010 02-10-056
Keywords: lex
Posted-Date: 20 Oct 2002 22:54:34 EDT

Lex Spoon wrote:
>
> Here's a harder example:
>
> /* parse "this */ 10 /* and this" */
>
>
> It will scan as four tokens:
>
> /*
> parse
> "this */ 10 /* and this"
> */
>
>
> The parser will be in trouble now if it wants to pull out the "10".


If it hurts, don't do that ;-)


Seriously, IMHO the 10 should be considered part of the comment.
Otherwise, inserting /* */ around a piece of code will not reliably
comment it out.
Besides, most humans (well, at least myself *g*) will parse the initial
line as a single comment, why should the scanner use a different assumption?


> Thus, you seem to need a special scanner state to handle the
  > meat of a comment.


If you really insist on making the example into two comments: yes,
things will get ugly quickly.


Basically, it depends on the questions what's the contents of a comment:
is it a sequence of characters, or a sequence of tokens? That's
something that should be found in the language definition.


Regards,
Joachim


Post a followup to this message

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