Re: [Haskell-cafe] CFG specification and analysis directly in Haskell

2011-09-30 Thread Heinrich Apfelmus
Anton Tayanovskyy wrote: John Meacham's frisby library [1] did something similar, though the technique is not as well-known as it should be. Looks like an excellent library, thank you! Note that you don't need to give explicit names to your rules anymore, the monad can do that for you. I wa

Re: [Haskell-cafe] CFG specification and analysis directly in Haskell

2011-09-27 Thread Joachim Breitner
Hi, Am Dienstag, den 27.09.2011, 14:58 +0200 schrieb Heinrich Apfelmus: > By the way, the old mdo notation was better suited to this task; the > new rec notation has some problems in this regard that will hopefully > be rectified soon. wasn’t mdo rec’tified? If you rectify rec, will that th

Re: [Haskell-cafe] CFG specification and analysis directly in Haskell

2011-09-27 Thread Anton Tayanovskyy
> John Meacham's frisby library [1] did something similar, though the > technique is not as well-known as it should be. Looks like an excellent library, thank you! > Note that you don't need to give explicit names to your rules anymore, the > monad can do that for you. I was using the names for

Re: [Haskell-cafe] CFG specification and analysis directly in Haskell

2011-09-27 Thread Heinrich Apfelmus
Anton Tayanovskyy wrote: As a weekend hack, I just realized that Haskell has this wonderful DoRec syntax that among other things seems to be able to let the user express context-free grammars together with their processing rules in normal Haskell code, without template Haskell or anything like th

[Haskell-cafe] CFG specification and analysis directly in Haskell

2011-09-25 Thread Anton Tayanovskyy
Hi, As a weekend hack, I just realized that Haskell has this wonderful DoRec syntax that among other things seems to be able to let the user express context-free grammars together with their processing rules in normal Haskell code, without template Haskell or anything like that, just like parser c