On 23 Jun 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 09:23:09AM -0400, Ted Zlatanov wrote: > On 23 Jun 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>>> Wasn't there a C grammer for Parse::RecDescent ? >>> Not that worked. Damian has acknowledged elsewhere that it shouldn't >>> have been included. >> It works for simple cases, and may be adequate for the OP's needs. I >> would recommend P::RD, because its grammar definitions are pretty >> similar to the Perl 6 grammar definitions (it will matter, some day), >> and because it's pretty good in general. About the only thing that's >> hard about it is parsing the error messages, which takes practice. > > I've tried P::RD. I didn't like it at all. It seemed to take an awful > lot of work to define a very simple language ...
That hasn't been my experience. > ... and I was not impressed by the documentation. > Next time I need a parser I'll try Parse::Yapp. I actually found Parse::Yapp's documentation much worse. P::RD has a lot of good docs and a FAQ. While it has shortcomings (speed is a problem for a lot of people, though for me it hasn't been too bad) documentation is not one of them. Ted _______________________________________________ Boston-pm mailing list Boston-pm@mail.pm.org http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-pm
