Am 13.03.2012 09:22, schrieb Aaron Meurer:
Thanks for the helpful advice.  So which method would you recommend
using for this?

Hard to tell right now. We need to see what grammars we want to support.

So the first step would probably be to draw up all the grammar rules for features present (and future, as far as we can fathom them). Make that as complete as possible - it's sometimes the innocent rule that will make or break a parsing technique.

Unless we're extremely lucky, that initial grammar will not work (except for Earley, which will accept anything). The next round will then be to see what modifications to the grammar are needed to make it acceptable for the various parsing techniques. For the ambiguity checking, any parser generator that uses a specific parsing technique will do. Prefer one with a record of good error messages, we'll need them.

Then it's time for the judgement call: Which techniques require what adaptations of the grammar, and which of the adaptations are acceptable and which aren't.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sympy" group.
To post to this group, send email to sympy@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.

Reply via email to