Vaclav Barta wrote: > On Wednesday 09 September 2009 11:24:06 Sam Barnett-Cormack wrote: >> Rule templatisation might be a funky feature to be added, but it doesn't >> exist at present, AFAIK. > I suppose most users of such capabilities would want to make their own syntax > (and semantics) anyway, IOW an ANTLR grammar preprocessor - in ANTLR, of > course... :-)
Nah, true built-in templatisation would be more useful, I reckon. Could potentially be quite clever (recursion, chaining of templates, etc). Even providing a standard set of templates covering common examples. Could even allow template libraries. -- Sam Barnett-Cormack List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest Unsubscribe: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "il-antlr-interest" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/il-antlr-interest?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
