From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 960A7BC48 for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2005 12:29:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtps-vbr1.xs4all.nl (smtps-vbr1.xs4all.nl [194.109.24.19]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j34ATd8N014422 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2005 12:29:39 +0200 Received: from [131.211.81.123] (levensweg.cs.uu.nl [131.211.81.123]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtps-vbr1.xs4all.nl (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j34ATP3e057347 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 4 Apr 2005 12:29:31 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from daan@cs.uu.nl) Message-ID: <425116FF.9030703@cs.uu.nl> Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 12:29:19 +0200 From: Daan Leijen User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Erik de Castro Lopo Cc: effbiae@ivorykite.com, caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: some comments on ocaml{lex,yacc} from a novice's POV References: <49464.202.164.198.46.1112355123.squirrel@www.ivorykite.com> <424DA923.7020106@tfb.com> <50130.202.164.198.46.1112418605.squirrel@www.ivorykite.com> <51945.202.164.198.46.1112586123.squirrel@www.ivorykite.com> <20050404154408.16534457.ocaml-erikd@mega-nerd.com> In-Reply-To: <20050404154408.16534457.ocaml-erikd@mega-nerd.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------000909090502040608010804" X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 42511713.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 ocaml:01 parsers:01 haskell:01 parser:01 pointers:01 parser:01 combinators:01 statically:01 compilers:01 compilers:01 compiler:01 statically:01 ocaml:01 parsers:01 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=HTML_50_60,HTML_MESSAGE, HTML_TITLE_EMPTY autolearn=disabled version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Level: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------000909090502040608010804 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: >>compare with caml solutions? compare with any other solution? >> >> > >There are parsers for Haskell which would compare very favourably >with your lisp parser. I haven't used them myself but I've seen >example code somewhere. > > The Parsec manual contains a few nice examples and pointers to further literature on parser combinators if you are interested. Everything is statically checked of course ;-) All the best, -- Daan Leijen. > > >>i'm told there are good scheme compilers. >> >> > >Since scheme is a dynamically typed language, scheme compilers are >unlikely to ever produce code as fast as a compiler for a statically >typed langugae like ocaml. > >Erik > > --------------000909090502040608010804 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:

compare with caml solutions? compare with any other solution?


There are parsers for Haskell which would compare very favourably 
with your lisp parser. I haven't used them myself but I've seen 
example code somewhere.

The Parsec manual contains a few nice examples and pointers to further literature
on parser combinators if you are interested.

<http://www.cs.uu.nl/~daan/parsec.html>

Everything is statically checked of course ;-)

All the best,
-- Daan Leijen.

i'm told there are good scheme compilers.


Since scheme is a dynamically typed language, scheme compilers are
unlikely to ever produce code as fast as a compiler for a statically 
typed langugae like ocaml.

Erik

--------------000909090502040608010804--