Related articles |
---|
Extending REG-EXP to 2-Dimension. mosh@ramanujan.cs.albany.edu (1994-11-21) |
Re: Extending REG-EXP to 2-Dimension. steve@cegelecproj.co.uk (1994-11-30) |
Re: Extending REG-EXP to 2-Dimension. ruiter@ruls41.fsw.leidenuniv.nl (1994-12-01) |
Re: Extending REG-EXP to 2-Dimension. rockwell@nova.umd.edu (1994-12-03) |
Re: Extending REG-EXP to 2-Dimension. lloyd@kauri.vuw.ac.nz (1994-12-05) |
Re: Extending REG-EXP to 2-Dimension. pwk@eb.ele.tue.nl (1994-12-05) |
Re: Extending REG-EXP to 2-Dimension. steve@cegelecproj.co.uk (1994-12-05) |
Re: Extending REG-EXP to 2-Dimension. bakul@netcom.com (1994-12-08) |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
From: | steve@cegelecproj.co.uk (Steve_Kilbane) |
Keywords: | lex, DFA |
Organization: | Compilers Central |
References: | 94-11-137 94-12-021 |
Date: | Mon, 5 Dec 1994 09:43:19 GMT |
Although I've often wished for this facility, I've never actually bothered
to think about what it involves before, so if I sound naive, that's my
excuse. :-)
It seems to me that the first problem is "what would a user expect this
to do?" The suggested "circles of text" seems fairly useless from a user's
perspective. I'd expect a user to be looking for something like one of:
- a single regexp that matches in one or more lines, i.e. there is one
match of the regexp for each line.
- a sequence of regexps, that can be matched to lines. The nth regexp
matches the nth line.
- a single regexp that matches the block of text, if that block of text
is first transformed into a "single" line (whether you treat newlines
a significant is optional here, I guess).
You can then further refine the semantics - in the first option, should
should all matches be the same as the first, or should any match do?
Once you've got a definition that the user could work with, *then* it
seems like a good idea to worry about the implementation.
steve
--
<Steve_Kilbane@cegelecproj.co.uk>
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.