Re: Backtracking through the source

[Dan Sugalski]

At 07:07 PM 11/29/00 +0000, Simon Cozens wrote:
>On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 02:02:31PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > I'm really thinking that the lexer, parser, and tokenizer can't be 
> anywhere
> > near as separate as we'd like. I think we're going to end up with a rather
> > odd mutant beast. Hopefully one that's understandable by reasonably sane
> > people...
>
>This would *honestly* be my preference; I think it would be far easier to
>write and understand than anything else. So long as it's nicely re-entrant we
>should be fine. My only worry is, how do we reconcile this with the idea of
>Perl having an easily modifiable grammar and being a good environment for
>little-language stuff?

That's a good question, and it depends on what Larry's thinking of for 
little languages. Smacking the perl parser around enough to handle, say, 
something C or Pythonish shouldn't be a huge hassle. Making it handle 
something Lisp-like, though, is another matter entirely.

                                        Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                         have teddy bears and even
                                      teddy bears get drunk