[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Please implement GLR + C++ + variant or at least warn user that it i
Re: Please implement GLR + C++ + variant or at least warn user that it is unavailable
Tue, 3 Mar 2015 16:36:00 +0100
> Le 27 févr. 2015 à 18:01, Askar Safin <address@hidden> a écrit :
> Please add variant support to GLR C++ parser. Reason is following:
> * Having C++ parser is cool. It allows us to have non-trivial C++ objects as
> semantic values
Yes, I agree.
> * But then (if we use non-trivial objects as semantic values) we need variant
Yes, I agree.
> * And (as docs say) nearly any modern programming language needs GLR parser
> and not LARL1
Well, I kinda disagree about this, but I do agree GLR is
> If you don't plan to add this support at near future, then, please, put big
> fat warning to docs that GLR + C++ + variant is not supported at the
> beginning of C++ section. If I knew this earlier I probably would not convert
> my C parser to C++ parser. Please, CC me if you want to answer
I'm sorry you were painted in the corner :( Valentin has been
working on a proper implementation of GLR for C++ with variants,
but it's unfinished work. I expect he'll be back on this during
Meanwhile, you _might_ want to try this modified version
of version of Bison that does provide this (GLR + Variants + C++),
but it's unsafe, badly written. It happens to work in some cases...
*Do not* use it for production code.
|[Prev in Thread]
||[Next in Thread]|
- Re: Please implement GLR + C++ + variant or at least warn user that it is unavailable,
Akim Demaille <=