Re: Do we need parsers?

Stefan -- I like the way you think...


Stefan Monnier wrote:
>
> dgay@barnowl.CS.Berkeley.EDU (David Gay) writes:
> > 2) you lose all the programmer tools that assume text-based
> programs,
> > e.g. grep, revision control systems, etc.
>
> grep can still be used since a text-representation is available (and
> can even be chosen) via an unparser. RCS is bit more painful in that


The idea I was working from is that the file could be displayed in
many different forms in the editor, or exported as text for
compilation.


Version control would be a part of the editing system (a repository data
base.)




> - getting rid of the text-representation allows more freedom, like
> having each
> user choose the representation they prefer (some might like
> lisp-style
> parentheses, others might prefer begin..end or {..}, ...)


This was another cool thing I was thinking about -- the user could
even skip {..} use altogether in favor of indentation. Then they
could print/export it in whatever style they want.


Because the structure is a composition of objects, you basically define
a visitor class that walks the objects to display them. You could
display them for editing, or as a flowchart w/symbols, or as a tree
(like Windoze dir tree) showing control constructions only.
--
Scott Stanchfield Santa Cruz,CA
Visit my PCCTS Tutorial at http://www.scruz.net/~thetick/pcctstut
Visit our new baby at http://www.scruz.net/~thetick/claire
--

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.