I surely for one don't want to rewrite the parser but we have someone looking for a student project here :)
There may be good reasons to hand code a parser I guess: http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.4/changes.html says the C++ parser has been recoded by hand instead of using a parser generator. I am not sure at all maintainability would be worse. I have corrected a few bugs in the current parser two-three months ago and this isn't what you can call an easy task. Now I agree that correcting a parser or a grammar is probably never an easy task. Performance would probably be the same. Anyway, like you said, a good baseline for a comparison. -----Original Message----- From: Brian Goetz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: jeudi 27 mai 2004 21:27 To: Lucene Developers List; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: suggestions for a student project > Done carefully, could it be worthwile to rewrite it from scratch without a > parser generator? I don't think that this would offer any improvement over the current parser for use in the Lucene project -- the maintainability would be worse, and the performance would probably be the same (and performacne of a query parser is almost irrelevant.) That said, if you really wanted to write a parser, it might be a useful baseline for comparing a rewritten parser -- the test cases include a number of specimen queries, so by comparing the results of the existing parser and your own, it would provide both a good "project target" and a baseline against which to test compliance. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
