From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2007 03:47:35 -0500
From: William Josephson <jkw@eecs.harvard.edu>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Replacements for lex
Message-ID: <20070120084735.GD84021@mero.morphisms.net>
References: <7871fcf50701191058w7ef924cer224b9c8e4f63321b@mail.gmail.com>
	<20070119191241.GB17033@augusta.math.psu.edu>
	<7871fcf50701191126x2e2031a2v9723d52ad2db6344@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <7871fcf50701191126x2e2031a2v9723d52ad2db6344@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 068f9ec8-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Fri, Jan 19, 2007 at 02:26:47PM -0500, Joel Salomon wrote:
> >I think that most people roll their own lexical analyzers under Plan 9.
> >That's typically not too hard to do, though.
>
> That's likely what I'll do for the final project (probably yet another
> C complier, but I might try my hand with [a subset of] D), but the

You'll learn a lot more if you don't try anything like C
let alone C++ or D.  For a semester-length project, you'll
learn far more if you work on a much smaller language --
ideally domain specific, in my opinion -- and really see it
through in detail.