It would be nice to have a parser to rule them all. I am currently using SmaCC and gets the job done. I really like its condense syntax and its syntax tool but also love the smalltalky feel of pettit parser.
Maybe one must bite the bullet and write perfomance critical parts in C or even use a C parsing engine as a back end of pettit parser ? On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 12:39 AM, Norbert Hartl <norb...@hartl.name> wrote: > > > Am 11.03.2015 um 23:03 schrieb Damien Cassou <damien.cas...@gmail.com>: > > > > Hi, > > > > The current pillar parser has several problems: > > > > - it is hard to understand and change > > - it discards input locations > > > > I think a refactor or rewrite is necessary. What are the pros and cons > of using PetitParser to do that? > > > The cons are that petit parser is a heavier component and we should never > underestimate that (just a reaction to a notion on this list). So we should > avoid making things more complex, especially dependency wise. > The pros is that petit parser will make it easier to extend and maintain > the pillar parser. I've read something about a new version of petit parser > that has a speedup of aprox. 1.000.000x. If that is the case then it is no > downgrade speed wise :) Another pro is IMHO that are some people that would > like to move petit parser closer (not too close) to the core. That again > would make it a more standard component that makes it easy to write parsers > for everyone. A good companion if you have regex and you exceed to > possibilities it provides. > > I really have a bad feeling while saying: It would be good to have pillar > based on petit parser. > > Norbert > > > > >
