[news.eclipse.technology.imp] Re: Pros and cons with projects xtext and

[<jin.phd@xxxxxxxxx>]

hi, Sven:
I'm not an LPG expert. But I'm just an LPG user as well:) I like to answer 
some questions as I known,

> Why do you think that LPG is more "eclipse"?
some projects in eclipse have used the LPG, jdt(modified verison as I 
understand)/cdt/mdt(ocl)/dtp/wtp... it wiill be a big community in the 
future, I think.

> We use the forward parsing nature of LL in code assistant, for instance.
cdt've done this problem cleverly to tackling with c/cpp using lpg. and imp 
provide a general framework.

> The most important is, that it's LL not LR.
LL  vs LR is an old topic. we have not speaking right to deepen into it. I 
just say the antlr and lpg are both great. Both of them could be used to 
deal with a large pieces of parser gen. work. It is nice to choose any each. 
My words about "dog food" is just my peroson viewpoint. I must to say, have 
no prejudice against antlr. The antlr v 3 do a great job in the parser gen 
field.

Jin