|any experience with PLY? firstname.lastname@example.org (Mark T) (2007-05-13)|
|Re: any experience with PLY? email@example.com (Nicola Musatti) (2007-05-14)|
|Re: any experience with PLY? firstname.lastname@example.org (Jason) (2007-05-14)|
|From:||Nicola Musatti <email@example.com>|
|Date:||14 May 2007 01:28:49 -0700|
|Posted-Date:||16 May 2007 03:00:47 EDT|
On May 13, 9:08 pm, Mark T <mark...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I'm contemplating using PLY to create a source to source translator -
> one assembler language (custom CPU) to another assembler language
> (standard CPU). I have some limited lex/yacc experience.
PLY was actually my first experience with a lex/yacc style generator
and I found it extremely convenient. Some theoretical background helps
in avoiding mistakes and diagnosing bugs, but one can always resort to
good ol' trial & error ;-)
I used PLY to parse a subset of SQL DDL. I already had a hand coded C+
+ parser for an even smaller subset, but I'm convinced that it took me
less to rewrite it in Python with PLY than it would have taken to
modify my C++ one.
Another advantage that should not be overlooked is the number of
libraries that are available to Python programmers, which may come
handy for other parts of one's application.
> Are there any other parser-generator tools I should consider? or
> should I just hand code everything?
Just about everybody around here is in a better position to answer
this question than I am.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.