From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id QAA08266; Tue, 5 Feb 2002 16:08:24 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA08690 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2002 16:08:23 +0100 (MET) Received: from tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de (tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de [141.76.75.101]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g15F8MH23759 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2002 16:08:22 +0100 (MET) Received: from ithif51 (ithif51 [141.76.75.51]) by tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de (8.12.0.Beta7/8.12.0.Beta7) with ESMTP id g15F8MQf014837 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2002 16:08:22 +0100 (MET) Received: from tews by ithif51 with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16Y7Co-0008Hi-00 for ; Tue, 05 Feb 2002 16:08:22 +0100 From: Hendrik Tews MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15455.62821.983393.899624@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 16:08:21 +0100 (CET) To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] camlp4o problem (was: otags problem) In-Reply-To: <20020204155242.B2338@verdot.inria.fr> References: <9BE7FA48-1771-11D6-A336-003065BDAA76@ece.ucsb.edu> <15454.38553.300800.53941@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <20020204155242.B2338@verdot.inria.fr> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.7.2 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Hi, Daniel de Rauglaudre writes: Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 15:52:42 +0100 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] camlp4o problem (was: otags problem) > For Daniel de Rauglaudre: Because normal ocaml users are now > sometimes requested to use camlp4o for parsing (for instance for > streams) I think it makes sense to provide a camlp4 parser that > is _exacly_ ocaml. Maybe by placing the quotation syntax in a > separate file, say pa_q.cmo? This is a problem of lexing, not parsing. I could add a flag to set or unset the lexing of quotations. I would like to have this flag. Remark: but to be _exactly_ ocaml, the only solution is to use _exactly_ the same technology, i.e. ocamlyacc. There will be always differences in the behaviour of the two systems. Well, what I meant is that - camlp4o parses a file if and only if ocamlc parses it, and - the resulting ast's are semantically equivalent. I think this should be possible. And I would suggest to add an operation mode to camlp4o that makes it equivalent with ocamlc (in the above sense). [Sorry for starting this discussion about syntax. I don't use the revised syntax because it not fully documented (e.g., revised syntax of objects). Further there is no grammar for the revised syntax. ] Bye, Hendrik ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr