El 15/10/2007, a las 14:21, "Pat Maddox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> On 10/14/07, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On 10/14/07, Pat Maddox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Actually a parser for this would be quite simple >> >> Dead simple. It would also allow us to do away with methods like >> Given, When and Then, which some people have objected to (because of >> the capitalization), because the stories are no longer expressed >> directly in Ruby. Internally, the parser could use a StepFactory >> to do >> things like create_given, create_when, etc (or however we decide to >> name these). > > Jay mentioned antlr. This parser is so simple though that I doubt we > would need/want that. There's not really any parsing at all in fact. > You just look at each line, figure out what token it is, and pass the > following string to a constructor. It should be like 60 lines of Ruby > code, and we don't have any external dependencies. I've done a couple of month's work with ANTLR (3.0) this year and based on my experiences I'd say it's not the right tool for this kind of job. You use ANTLR if: 1. Parsing speed is really important. 2. You need to recognize a relatively complex grammar (most likely a context-sensitive language). 3. You don't mind being tied to Java tool-chain (even though your output target language is non-Java, the ANTLR tool itself is Java). 4. You have lots of time on your hands to develop, debug and fine- tune the delicate and complex machinery that is an ANTLR-generated recognizer. In short, I found ANTLR fiendishly difficult to use, so for a simple task like this, especially one where parsing is *not* going to be a bottleneck, the simplest possible solution (parsing with hand-written Ruby) is going to be the best one. Cheers, Wincent _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
