On 3/13/06, Chris Quenelle <Chris.Quenelle at sun.com> wrote:
> > Hmmpff... in the worst case we have to hack full interpreter do deal
> > with the dbx syntax, but AFAIK there are ways to work around it. I am
> > not fully sure whether your extensions are context-sensitive or not
> > (we'll be in trouble if the Sun-extended dbx syntax is context-sensitive
> > - then we have to write a full interpreter in ksh - otherwise just
> > clever ksh hacking is required).
>
> I'm not sure I know what you mean by "context sensitive" here.
>
> The meaning of '>' is definately context sensitive (as I mentioned before).
> It depends on whether you are evaluating a ksh-style command or
> a dbx-style command. Most dbx commands are actually interpreted
> in ksh-style mode, for this purpose. There are a small number
> of commands that take language expressions and need to use
> different parsing rules. Unfortunately those include the
> most-used commands ('print' and 'stop' etc).
>
> eg: stop in foo -if a > b
Do you mean that the dbx syntax extensions are limited to a specific
set of dbx commands or do you mean that the extensions apply to all
dbx commands?
--
_ Felix Schulte
_|_|_ mailto:felix.schulte at gmail.com
(0 0)
ooO--(_)--Ooo
