"Walter Bright" <newshou...@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:i9vn3l$bd...@digitalmars.com... > Nick Sabalausky wrote: >> What's wrong with regexes? > > They don't handle recursion.
Neither do plain-old strings. But regexes will get you farther than plain strings before needing to resort to customized lexing. But I'm a big data-driven fan anyway. If you're not than I can see why it wouldn't seem as appealing as it does to me. In any case, if I have a chance I might see about adapting my Goldie ( www.dsource.org/projects/goldie ) library to more Phobos-friendly requirements. It's already a fully-usable lexer/parser (and the lexer/parser parts can be used independantly), with a complete grammar description language and I already have misc related tools written. And it's mostly working on D2 already (just need the next DMD because it has a fix for a bug that's a breaker for one of the tools). So if I can get it into a state more suitable for Phobos then that might end up putting things ahead of where they would be if someone just started from scratch. The initial versions might not be completely Phobos-ified, but it could definitely get there (especially if I had some guidance from people with more Phobos2 experience than me). Would Walter & co be interested in this? If not, I won't bother, but if so, then I may give it a shot.
