Subject: Re: Looking for a nail
From: John Prevost <email@example.com>
In-Reply-To: Ian T Zimmerman's message of "Tue, 26 Jan 1999 11:20:47 -0800"
Date: 27 Jan 1999 20:30:50 -0500
Accidentally sent this as a personal reply. Here it is to the list.
Ian T Zimmerman <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > - adding start conditions a la flex to ocamllex
> I haven't thought of this really hard, but I bet there is already a
> way to do that. If there isn't, I would think hard again to find a
> cleaner, more functional (less stateful) way to do it. If the current
> condition is kept in a global as in flex, that just drops again the
> reentrancy that Christian has been working so hard to achieve.
The current condition already exists in ocamllex--this is what the
rule name is equivalent to. The one thing it doesn't do is support
the idea that some regexp -> action specs should be in more than one
rule--which is no real great loss.
I think making the languages of ocamllex and ocamlyacc slightly nicer
wouldn't be entirely out of order, as would writing them in Caml
rather than C.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 02 2000 - 11:58:18 MET