Re: Compiler Books? Parsers?

Quinn Tyler Jackson wrote:
>
> 6. Parser generators encourage standardization and community. There are
> well-known ways to write grammar subsections that parse function parameter
> lists, white space, and dangling-else's. Most of these well known ways are
> expressed in the syntax of parser generator specifications. Delphi, C++, VB,
> C#, Java, Perl programmers can benefit from the knowledge of others who have
> already solved the same parsing issues at a level of abstraction above the
> implementation language. (Without parser generators, many of the questions
> found in this newsgroup could not be concisely expressed, and answers
> provided by experts would adhere to no standard.)
>


Parhaps I am being quixotic, but:


There are lots of languages being designed that have very cobbled-up
syntax, that doesn't fit any clean formal model. It seems mostly only
parser writers notice this consciously.


Is there any hope that more widespread use of parser generators by
people designing syntax in the first place would improve this situation?


Or was that what you were saying?


----------------
Rodney M. Bates

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