Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
Bug in ocamlyacc
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2007-04-24 (18:25)
From: skaller <skaller@u...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Bug in ocamlyacc
On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 12:23 +0200, Diego Olivier FERNANDEZ PONS wrote:
> Bonjour,
> > I won't use Menhir for that reason either.[...]
> Come on, Skaller. You know as well as everyone that adding a tool that  
> is not mature enough to the standard distribution is a bad idea.

Not if it is optional, like the ocamlbuild tool for example.

> Mehnir is clearly the "official" candidate for replacement of  
> CamlYacc, without yet being mandatory. This gives you the time to  
> port, criticize and ask for improvements. Look the mess that happened  
> with CamlP4 which didn't follow this pattern.

There do indeed appear to be some issues with camlp4.
However what was done was the 'right thing' despite that --
IMHO of course.

First: few would have tested it, given the incompatibilities,
it it were not forced onto the market.

Second: Ocaml 3.10 is still in beta, and the author(s) of
camlp4 *needed* the feedback and participation from the community.

Third: the community wanted a better camlp4: this is the price,
and I believe most people using camlp4 are willing to help
and get it working.

Fourth: it had to be done sometime, and I would guess that
there was no technical choice but a painful change.

However with Menhir, the issues aren't so bad because it doesn't
yet need to replace Ocamlyacc, just be available as an alternative.

> So instead of being complaining because Mehnir is not yet in the  
> standard distribution,

I'm not complaining, but stating my reasons why I think it 
should be

>  you should be porting your CamlYacc code to  
> ensure that when the tools are swapped, Menhir will make your code  
> simpler, faster and cleaner.

.. and also making it clear, I hope, why I won't be
using it in my product until it is.

Unfortunately my team also has limited resources.
I already tried Menhir and provided some feedback.
I'm supportive of it. But I cannot convert my
production code to use a third party library
unless I can include the source in my product.

Felix doesn't use any external third party libraries:
it uses the system Ocaml and C++ libraries, and it
uses Cil/Frontc, Elkhound and Tre .. which are included
in the Felix system as source code and built by the
Felix build system. 

I might consider doing that with Menhir if the licence
were FFAU like MIT/BSD/Boost/Creative Commons.

John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net>
Felix, successor to C++: