Am 02.02.2012 um 03:02 schrieb Kenneth Lerman:
>> READ => s(hundred) m 3
>> bad number format (conversion failed) parsing ''
>> s(hundred) m 3
>>
>> That kind of 'language spec' can stand improvement.. so my parser doubles as
>> a reverse-engineering tool;)
> I believe that the comment IS bein
On 01.02.12 16:45, Michael Haberler wrote:
>
>
> Am 01.02.2012 um 13:36 schrieb Erik Christiansen:
>
> > On 01.02.12 11:48, Michael Haberler wrote:
> Currently I dont see a formal way to describe the interdependencies of
> several words on a block. You can do the optional parameter words in
> th
On 02/01/2012 10:45 AM, Michael Haberler wrote:
>
> Am 01.02.2012 um 13:36 schrieb Erik Christiansen:
>
>> On 01.02.12 11:48, Michael Haberler wrote:
>>> Am 01.02.2012 um 09:23 schrieb Erik Christiansen:
The grammar specifies expression and control flow constructs, but seems
100% devoid o
Am 01.02.2012 um 13:36 schrieb Erik Christiansen:
> On 01.02.12 11:48, Michael Haberler wrote:
>> Am 01.02.2012 um 09:23 schrieb Erik Christiansen:
>>> The grammar specifies expression and control flow constructs, but seems
>>> 100% devoid of any explicit gcode grammar. I've scrolled up and down
On 1 February 2012 14:36, Erik Christiansen wrote:
> because having a documented grammar in the parser would only allow
> run-time _extending_the_rs274ngc_interpreter_by_remapping_codes. It
> would only permit remapping of standard gcodes by changing the grammar.
> But the need to remap gcodes ha
On 01.02.12 11:48, Michael Haberler wrote:
> Am 01.02.2012 um 09:23 schrieb Erik Christiansen:
> > The grammar specifies expression and control flow constructs, but seems
> > 100% devoid of any explicit gcode grammar. I've scrolled up and down
> > twice now, but still can't see any rapids, moves, f
>
> See for example the interesting pycparser project at
> http://code.google.com/p/pycparser. It uses clang/llvm :
> http://eli.thegreenplace.net/2011/07/03/parsing-c-in-python-with-clang/ which
> is a bit on the heavy side for the task at hand, but I already used pycparser
> successfully to
Erik,
Am 01.02.2012 um 09:23 schrieb Erik Christiansen:
> On 01.02.12 00:05, Michael Haberler wrote:
>
> (1)
> The grammar specifies expression and control flow constructs, but seems
> 100% devoid of any explicit gcode grammar. I've scrolled up and down
> twice now, but still can't see any rapid
On 01.02.12 00:05, Michael Haberler wrote:
> ok, while this wonderful discussion was raging on, I built a working
> parser for the current linuxcnc dialect, as an experiment in
> feasability (this is NOT an end-user tool!)
It would take all the fun out of it, if it were. :-)
Before using the deb
On 1/31/2012 6:05 PM, Michael Haberler wrote:
> ok, while this wonderful discussion was raging on, I built a working parser
> for the current linuxcnc dialect, as an experiment in feasability (this is
> NOT an end-user tool!)
>
> http://git.mah.priv.at/gitweb/emc2-dev.git/shortlog/refs/heads/pars
ok, while this wonderful discussion was raging on, I built a working parser for
the current linuxcnc dialect, as an experiment in feasability (this is NOT an
end-user tool!)
http://git.mah.priv.at/gitweb/emc2-dev.git/shortlog/refs/heads/parser-v2-dev
- Michael
ps: I'd appreciate feedback from
11 matches
Mail list logo
