From: hatespyware@... (anon luker) Date: 2004-03-04T06:19:43+09:00 Subject: Re: perl6 grammar rules in ruby "Ara.T.Howard" wrote in message news:... > On Mon, 1 Mar 2004, Charles Comstock wrote: > > > > Here we run into a bunch of problems with translation. I will start > > thinking of a nice way to embed this in the ruby syntax, as I don't really > > think that much of the Perl style syntax. While the inheritence > > portion MAY be possible to implement in the current ruby syntax, other parts > > would definitely need a custom regex engine, which probably sacrifices speed > > amoung other things. > > sound like an o.k. idea, but what advantage would it have over racc, which is > already distributed with ruby? i must say the value of dynamically creating > parsers seems like it would not be too heavily used - just making a good > parser is hard enough and i would think that any grammars simple enough to > generate parsers for on the fly would be simply enough to parse by hand. > considering that, i perfer the approach of racc which will generate a static > parser using a very ruby-esc syntax. > > -a FWIW, I am having a love affair w/ boost::spirit. I use it _all_ the time. Planning a proper grammar for even trivial things like command-line arguments and then concisely parsing them w/ spirit gives me a warm fuzzy feeling. I would never ever ever use the traditional parser generators (or their clones) for such tasks, though (nevermind that I prefer writing right-recursive grammars). Spirit's style is very much tied to the language for which it was written, but I still think that it is a good role-model.