From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from discorde.inria.fr (discorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.38]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E15E3BC69 for ; Sun, 6 May 2007 23:05:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ipmail01.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail01.adl2.internode.on.net [203.16.214.140]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l46L5BFQ022166 for ; Sun, 6 May 2007 23:05:13 +0200 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.14,500,1170595800"; d="scan'208";a="124022888" Received: from ppp8-148.lns1.syd7.internode.on.net (HELO [192.168.1.201]) ([59.167.8.148]) by ipmail01.adl2.internode.on.net with ESMTP; 07 May 2007 06:35:10 +0930 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] 246 constructors? From: skaller To: Till Varoquaux Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr In-Reply-To: <9d3ec8300705061331u353f7038x720ea570f5ec4b64@mail.gmail.com> References: <1178480953.4443.4.camel@rosella.wigram> <200705062050.14105.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <1178482830.4443.6.camel@rosella.wigram> <9d3ec8300705061331u353f7038x720ea570f5ec4b64@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 07 May 2007 07:05:07 +1000 Message-Id: <1178485507.4443.19.camel@rosella.wigram> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 463E4307.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; constructors:01 0200,:01 usefull:01 tokens:01 ocamlyacc:01 constructors:01 variants:01 ocamlyacc:01 non-terminal:01 sourceforge:01 polymorphic:01 wrote:01 integer:01 caml-list:01 grammar:01 On Sun, 2007-05-06 at 22:31 +0200, Till Varoquaux wrote: > I'm guessing a patch against dypgen could prove usefull then. I have 221 tokens, and 233 non-terminals .. both just barely within the 246 limit. Looking at dypgen code it is using integer sequence numbers: I can't tell at this time whether it uses magic. I guess that Ocamlyacc uses magic. Not sure about Menhir. * Magic which assumes sequential tags of constructors isn't compatible with polymorphic variants. * It looks like Ocamlyacc is close to blowing up too The dypgen grammar representation is built of symbols of the variant type with a case for each terminal and non-terminal AND parametrised by all the non-terminals: so there are around 500 cases with 233 type parameters. -- John Skaller Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net