Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| Related articles |
|---|
| (E)BNF Grammar to XML for LALR(1) parse table? Cox.Jason@gmail.com (2008-01-14) |
| Re: (E)BNF Grammar to XML for LALR(1) parse table? Cox.Jason@gmail.com (2008-01-15) |
| Re: (E)BNF Grammar to XML for LALR(1) parse table? englere_geo@yahoo.com (Eric) (2008-01-15) |
| Re: (E)BNF Grammar to XML for LALR(1) parse table? paul@paulbmann.com (Paul B Mann) (2008-02-15) |
| Re: (E)BNF Grammar to XML for LALR(1) parse table? scooter.phd@gmail.com (scooter.phd@gmail.com) (2008-02-17) |
| From: | Cox.Jason@gmail.com |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | Tue, 15 Jan 2008 07:35:15 -0800 (PST) |
| Organization: | Compilers Central |
| References: | 08-01-042 |
| Keywords: | parse, C# |
| Posted-Date: | 15 Jan 2008 10:42:05 EST |
On Jan 14, 4:28 pm, Cox.Ja...@gmail.com wrote:
> I have created a grammar for a little calculator language my company
> created (literally takes constants, variables, parenthesis, and basic
> arithmetic). We work exclusively in C# and I am having a difficult
> time finding tools to generate a business-class, maintainable lexer
> and parser. ...
>
> Any magic bullet parser generators welcome as well :)
> [If it really is just an expression language, an operator precedence
> parser, which is easy to hand-code, should be all you need. -John]
There is a possibility that the "language" may be expanded in the
future to include things like max and min functions as well as
functions that do some proprietary things. You are probably right that
I could do an operator precedence parser and be done with, but I worry
about future scalability.
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.