hi! > Le 8 févr. 2019 à 12:39, Peng Yu <pengyu...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 11:49 PM Akim Demaille <a...@lrde.epita.fr> wrote: > >> I'm a bit confused here: did you really mean "another parser", or did >> you mean "another scanner"? If you do mean "another parser", I'm not >> sure how you would coordinate the several layers. > > > Probably it should be another scanner. I only has a vague idea and I don’t > know what will the implementation details.
I have not studied carefully how the heretics are parsed, so I might have said naive things. > I’d like to know what is the best way to structure the parsing code. Given > a lot of code of bash started 30 years ago, I’d expect at least some part > of the code is not the best according to today’s standard. I’d like to > know anything that can improve it. For a start, I don't understand why so much of the code is written in K&R. I find this amazing. Besides, it uses a parser generator that has dropped K&R for ages. So honestly, if you are cleaning up bash, I would first move its C to 1990. Then in the grammar, I would also use the literal string aliases: IMHO the grammar file is much easier to read, and the error messages are expected to be nicer too. _______________________________________________ help-bison@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-bison
