Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cdt-dev] LR parser

I think if that parser was done with ANTLR, it would be easier to find someone to take care of it. Not many people are familiar with LPG.

And it would be really hard to do C++ with any parser generator. The ambiguities make it almost impossible. Handcoding as we’ve done gives us full control over the flow. Even gcc abandoned LALR for a hand coded parser a few years ago.

My 2 cents,
Doug.

From: Beth Tibbitts <beth@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Monday, December 16, 2013 at 10:29 AM
To: "CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] LR parser

It hasn't been dropped as far as I know... and is needed by the UPC editor. I think other folks have used this more generalized parser for other things too.
UPC is an important language for Parallel Application developers and their eyes always light up when I say that Eclipse supports it.
Yes, I think the LR (general) parser could use some TLC. I think its underlying use of LPG (http://sourceforge.net/projects/lpg/) could stand to be updated, but I think it works as it is so far with an older version
LR parser (part of CDT) needs a champion and a little TLC...

...Beth

Beth Tibbitts


On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Peter Watkins <peter.watkins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
If the LR parser is deprecated, how do we extend the pre-processor (#defines, etc.) part of the GNUCPPSourceParser? I've attempted to do this before, but I had to duplicate so much of the existing CDT code inside of my language plugin, it felt like I was duplicating the entire CDT.

Is adding new pre-processor keywords to the new existing parser supported?

Sorry to hijack a thread, I just wanted to present a use-case that may not be supported with the existing parser.

Why was the LR parser dropped? No maintainer? Too slow?

Thanks.

Peter



From:        Doug Schaefer <dschaefer@xxxxxxx>
To:        "cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx" <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, CDT Mailing List <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date:        12/15/2013 09:03 PM
Subject:        Re: [cdt-dev] LR parser
Sent by:        cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx




The short answer is no, it wasn't really an alternative. And it's pretty near dead as far as I can tell.

Sent from my BlackBerry Z30 smartphone.
 Original Message
From: Nathan Ridge
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2013 2:50 PM
To: CDT Mailing List
Reply To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: [cdt-dev] LR parser


Is the LR parser (org.eclipse.cdt.core.lrparser) supposed to be an
alternative for GNUCPPSourceParser?

Does anyone use it?

Does anyone maintain it? I have made some fixes to GNUCPPSourceParser
in the past but have not made corresponding fixes to the LR parser.

Thanks,
Nate
_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev


_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev



Back to the top