On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 7:46 PM, kovas boguta <kovas.bog...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I agree that would be a Good Thing. This looks like an excellent start. > > Is this specification executable in Instaparse? > > IMO specs that are immediately computable are more useful and more likely > to be correct. > No, not as it stands currently the syntax is surely inedible for Instaparse. I do agree that encoding to work with Instaparse would be an useful additional verification. It is something I've thought about. I may tackle that once I'm confident that the obvious kinks have been worked out of the syntax. // Ben -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
