From: Ryan Hanks <ryandhanks@...>
Date: 2006-11-07T19:46:58+09:00
Subject: Re: rex & racc vs. ruby-lex & ruby-yacc

------=_Part_3880_25466908.1162896404595
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

p.s.  it's my understanding that ruby-* requires flex and yacc, while rex
and racc are pure ruby (please correct me if I'm wrong).  That being said,
I'm mostly interested in functionality and ease-of-implementation
differences between the two pairs of packages...

p.p.s. as I said, I'm looking to build a parser for CSS2.  might there be an
entirely different parser generator for ruby that I should be looking to use
given the nature of the grammar (
http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-CSS2-19980512/grammar.html) I'm looking to
parse (such as tdp4r http://rubyforge.org/projects/tdp4r/)?

Thanks again.

On 11/7/06, Ryan Hanks <ryandhanks@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm new to lex and yacc and trying to use one of their ruby derivatives to
> build a parser for level 2 cascading style-sheets (CSS2).  I'm having
> trouble deciding whether to use rex & racc or ruby-lex & ruby-yacc.  Can
> someone help me out by explaining to me the ramifications of choosing
> between these two?  Does anyone have a particular preference for one over
> the other?
>
> Thanks,
> Ryan Hanks
>
>

------=_Part_3880_25466908.1162896404595--