caml-list - the Caml user's mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chris Hecker <checker@d6.com>
To: Daniel de Rauglaudre <daniel.de_rauglaudre@inria.fr>, caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: [Caml-list] LL, LR, and camlp4 (was Re: syntax change)
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 01:09:11 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20020205005831.03799740@arda.pair.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020205094244.A23442@verdot.inria.fr>


> Could you reformulate your question? I don't understand. What is an
>*RD* parser?

Sorry, I'm the farthest thing from a compiler expert, so bear with me.

You said that you liked LL because it was easier and simpler to parse.  You mentioned that you used a recursive descent (RD) parser in camlp4 for the revised syntax (since it's LL) and for the ocaml syntax (but were only able to parse it with recursive descent with hacks because it's LR, I think).  I assume that meant you used a hand-written parser, not a parser generated by a tool.

My question is just why did you hand-write the parser, rather than using a tool like yacc?  Was it because of the extensibility and hooks you needed in camlp4 and there's no way to make an extensible generated parser?  Are parser generators not all they're cracked up to be?  If so, why does caml use yacc?

Make sense now?

I don't really know how camlp4 works internally, nor do I really know much about LL, LR, yacc, recursive descent, etc.  Just enough to be dangerous (where dangerous is defined as asking unintelligible questions :).

Thanks,
Chris


-------------------
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


  reply	other threads:[~2002-02-05  9:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-02-02  0:12 [Caml-list] otags problem Shivkumar Chandrasekaran
2002-02-04 14:11 ` [Caml-list] camlp4o problem (was: otags problem) Hendrik Tews
2002-02-04 14:52   ` Daniel de Rauglaudre
2002-02-04 15:08     ` Markus Mottl
2002-02-04 15:41       ` Daniel de Rauglaudre
2002-02-04 15:57         ` Christophe Raffalli
2002-02-04 17:06           ` Daniel de Rauglaudre
2002-02-04 16:25         ` [Caml-list] syntax change (was: camlp4o problem) Markus Mottl
2002-02-04 17:01           ` Daniel de Rauglaudre
2002-02-04 17:46             ` Markus Mottl
2002-02-04 18:08               ` Daniel de Rauglaudre
2002-02-06  8:19                 ` M E Leypold @ labnet
2002-02-04 18:28             ` Mattias Waldau
2002-02-04 20:11               ` Markus Mottl
2002-02-04 22:52                 ` Chris Hecker
2002-02-04 23:04                   ` Benjamin C. Pierce
2002-02-04 23:28                     ` Markus Mottl
2002-02-04 23:20                   ` Markus Mottl
2002-02-05  2:39                   ` Daniel de Rauglaudre
2002-02-05  2:55                     ` Chris Hecker
2002-02-05  2:01                 ` Brian Rogoff
2002-02-05 10:33                   ` Markus Mottl
2002-02-05 11:53                     ` Remi VANICAT
2002-02-05 12:05                       ` Daniel de Rauglaudre
2002-02-05 17:23                       ` Stefano Zacchiroli
2002-02-22 10:15                       ` [Caml-list] Emacs mode for revised syntax? Johan Georg Granström
2002-02-22 10:21                         ` Christian Gillot
2002-02-06  8:23                 ` [Caml-list] syntax change (was: camlp4o problem) M E Leypold @ labnet
2002-02-04 23:04           ` Chris Hecker
2002-02-05  2:47             ` Daniel de Rauglaudre
2002-02-05  2:59               ` Chris Hecker
2002-02-05  8:42                 ` Daniel de Rauglaudre
2002-02-05  9:09                   ` Chris Hecker [this message]
2002-02-05  9:31                     ` [Caml-list] LL, LR, and camlp4 (was Re: syntax change) Daniel de Rauglaudre
2002-02-05  9:33                     ` Xavier Leroy
2002-02-05 12:17                       ` Diego olivier FERNANDEZ PONS
2002-02-05  3:40     ` [Caml-list] camlp4o problem (was: otags problem) Patrick M Doane
2002-02-05  8:57       ` Daniel de Rauglaudre
2002-02-06  4:00         ` Patrick M Doane
2002-02-05 15:08     ` Hendrik Tews
2002-02-05 16:13       ` Daniel de Rauglaudre
2002-02-06 19:17         ` Yaron M. Minsky
2002-02-06 20:02           ` [Caml-list] Re: bug (was: camlp4o problem) Daniel de Rauglaudre
2002-02-04 22:15   ` [Caml-list] camlp4o problem (was: otags problem) Shivkumar Chandrasekaran

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4.3.2.7.2.20020205005831.03799740@arda.pair.com \
    --to=checker@d6.com \
    --cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
    --cc=daniel.de_rauglaudre@inria.fr \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).