| Related articles |
|---|
| Parsers are easy to write (was: Re: Backtracking yacc) markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (1992-09-25) |
| Quantum Parsing (was: Re: Parsers are easy to write) markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (1992-09-28) |
| Re: Quantum Parsing (was: Re: Parsers are easy to write) dak@kaa.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (1992-09-30) |
| Re: Quantum Parsing (was: Re: Parsers are easy to write) markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (1992-10-03) |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| From: | markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) |
| Organization: | Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee |
| Date: | Sat, 3 Oct 1992 16:52:39 GMT |
| Keywords: | parse, yacc, Fortran |
| References: | 92-09-185 92-09-203 |
dak@kaa.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (David Kastrup) writes:
>Ever written a parser for @#%$#@ Fortran?...
Can't say I ever heard of @#%$#@ Fortran. Must be a vulgar dialect or
something. :)
>Write a parser for that, if you like. And building a recursive thing
>with backtracking and certain state values produces essentially nothing
>that a parser generator could not produce. Only that you may be less
>efficient. Only pretty simple grammars can be substantially faster
>parsed by a handwritten parser.
I seriously doubt you'll even be able to write a spec to a parser
generator as concise as the result to the technique outlined, much less
generate one.
>[I wrote a yacc parser for Fortran, ... -John]
If you want, we can use the moderator's yacc source as both definition of
the challenge and measure of success.
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.