On Mon, 18 Dec 2000, David Grove wrote:
Andy Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The issues of 'use Python' or 'use Pythonish' are a quite different
issue.
I don't think anyone believes it ought to be easy to *write* the
Pythonish
module.
I do.
That's the problem. This is a
On Sat, 16 Dec 2000, David Grove wrote:
Because what is the parser/lexer/tokenizer parsing? Perl? Pythonic?
Javanese? All of them? Thinking of just the parser as a single entity
seems to me to be headed into trouble unless we can define in advance what
type of role these dialects will play
Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Something I though of:
If you're trying to write an interactive perl inputer - either a perl shell
or just the command prompt on the debugger it would be useful if you
could tell the parser that the chunk of source you're giving it may be
incomplete.
Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 12:43:15PM +, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 01:20:07AM +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
I'm assuming we're all sort of thinking that input is certainly
[good stuff]
Thanks, but you were supposed to
At 11:58 AM 12/17/00 +, David Grove wrote:
As the maker of such an editor, I wouldn't mind getting any help from perl
that can be gotten in this area. It's not really the rules that are
gotchas, but the exceptions to the rules. The elements that you mentioned
(strings and regexen) are
At 12:17 PM 12/17/00 +, David Grove wrote:
Andy Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Another route to keep in mind is spending effort working on and with
things such as perl-byacc (and maybe even the yet-to-be-written
perl-lex)
that help turn simple "languages" into perl.
That sounds
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(Keeping in mind the input is source, and
the output is a syntax tree)
Will you be my hero?
Or
Your clarity is sincerely appreciated.
Ok, _from_ the books on the reading list, I'm seeing no precedent for a
parser/lexer/tokenizer that uses multiple
