Related articles |
---|
Several flex scanners share common rules/definitions? markus.cl@gmx.de (2004-06-26) |
Re: Several flex scanners share common rules/definitions? cbarron413@adelphia.net (Carl Barron) (2004-06-28) |
Re: Several flex scanners share common rules/definitions? snicol@apk.net (Scott Nicol) (2004-06-28) |
Re: Several flex scanners share common rules/definitions? haberg@matematik.su.se (Hans Aberg) (2004-06-28) |
Re: Several flex scanners share common rules/definitions? clint@0lsen.net (Clint Olsen) (2004-06-30) |
Re: Several flex scanners share common rules/definitions? johnmillaway@yahoo.com (John Millaway) (2004-06-30) |
Re: Several flex scanners share common rules/definitions? sjohnson@mathworks.com (Steve Johnson) (2004-07-13) |
From: | markus.cl@gmx.de (Markus Dehmann) |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
Date: | 26 Jun 2004 23:54:42 -0400 |
Organization: | http://groups.google.com |
Keywords: | lex, question |
Posted-Date: | 26 Jun 2004 23:54:42 EDT |
I have two scanners that use basically the same regular expressions
and differ only in a few details. How can I write the two lex files so
that I don't have to write the common things twice?
For example, my tow scanners both use these and several other
definitions and rules:
digit [0-9]
octet [0-7]
hexet [0-9a-fA-F]
uAlpha [A-Z]
lAlpha [a-z]
alpha ({uAlpha}|{lAlpha})
%%
\n { lineNum++; }
{digit}+ { process_digit(yytext); }
...
I don't want to write this again and again for each scanner that uses
these. How can I make a kind of scanner base class? Or can I just
include these basic common rules in each of my scanners?
Thanks
Markus
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.