Two ex-colleagues of mine published a paper in last year's OOPSLA about
a macro system for Java.  In their paper they briefly mention Camlp4 in
the "related work" section.  They say that because Camlp4 is
grammar-based, it can't guarantee parseability.  Is this true, or did
they not understand Camlp4 properly?

Does anyone here have any more to contribute comparing the two
approaches?

The authors in question are Jonathan Bachrach and Keith Playford, and
the title of their paper is something like "The Java Syntactic
Extender", OOPSLA 2001.

Dave.



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