[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GSOC PEG project
From: |
Andy Wingo |
Subject: |
Re: GSOC PEG project |
Date: |
Sat, 17 Jul 2010 14:21:51 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) |
On Sun 11 Jul 2010 09:48, Michael Lucy <address@hidden> writes:
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Andy Wingo <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> Humm, another thing to think about: (ice-9 regex) returns "match
>> structures", which are really just vectors; have a look at them, and if
>> it makes sense to mimic that interface, re-exporting those accessors
>> somehow, please do.
>
> So, three potential paths from here:
> 1. Mimic the match structure interface as much as possible.
> 2. Have a similar but differently-named "peg-match structure"
> interface that behaves mostly the same but has a few different
> functions (I think naming them something slightly different would lead
> to fewer people assuming they worked exactly the same as match
> structures).
> 3. Just having a different interface.
>
> I'm leaning toward (2); what do other people think? I'd probably:
> 1. Not have a peg-match:count function at all.
> 2. Not have the functions take submatch numbers.
> 3. Have peg-match:substring return the actual substring.
> 4. Have another function peg-match:parse-tree that returns the parse
> tree.
Yes, if the needs are different, there's no sense in trying to horn the
present into the past's shoe. Take the good conventions from (ice-9
match), but there is no strict need for compatibility.
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/
- GSOC PEG project, Michael Lucy, 2010/07/05
- Re: GSOC PEG project, Ludovic Courtès, 2010/07/05
- Re: GSOC PEG project, Michael Lucy, 2010/07/05
- Re: GSOC PEG project, Andy Wingo, 2010/07/09
- Re: GSOC PEG project, Michael Lucy, 2010/07/11
- Re: GSOC PEG project,
Andy Wingo <=
- Re: GSOC PEG project, Ludovic Courtès, 2010/07/17
- Re: GSOC PEG project, Andy Wingo, 2010/07/18
Re: GSOC PEG project, Andy Wingo, 2010/07/08