[antlr-interest] Re: XML parsing

Oliver Zeigermann oliver at zeigermann.de
Wed Jun 11 10:18:44 PDT 2003


ASTFactory had to be extended in order to allow AST creation from 
strings (no type). This is fully compatible with the original ANTLR 
code as it simply involves making "AST create(String)" public (was 
protected). You will find the new source of ASTFactory in the 
distribution. 

You will also find the file "Open-Issues.txt" in the distribution 
which summarises what is missing. For short I can tell, XPA is very 
stable and functional. I left the status to alpha to indicated 
things may still change a bit on request of users. So, this is your 
chance to make me adapt XPA to your needs ;)

Oliver

--- In antlr-interest at yahoogroups.com, Matt Benson <gudnabrsam at y...> 
wrote:
> The first things I notice are that the latest version
> is named like an alpha, and that the ANTLR jar is
> labeled as having been patched.  Can you give a quick
> run-down on the current status of XPA and the nature
> of the ANTLR patching taking place?
> 
> Thanks,
> Matt
> 
> 
> --- Oliver Zeigermann <oliver at z...> wrote:
> > I have implemented a framework of what you describe:
> > 
> > http://www.zeigermann.de/xpa/index.html
> > 
> > It allows you to feed XML SAX events into ANTLR
> > parsers as token 
> > streams. Optionally, if you do not care for space,
> > you can create an 
> > AST from a SAX parser and transform it using ANTLR
> > tree parsers.
> > 
> > Oliver
> > 
> > --- In antlr-interest at yahoogroups.com, Matt Benson
> > <gudnabrsam at y...> 
> > wrote:
> > > I am involved with a project of which one of the
> > most
> > > daunting components is to take a large XML
> > document
> > > and insert its contents in a relational database. 
> > The
> > > structure of the document allows for repetitions
> > of
> > > many of its elements, and may include the same
> > types
> > > of elements with different meanings based on
> > context. 
> > > I was trying to decide whether something like XSLT
> > > might help with this problem, when I was struck by
> > the
> > > idea that a recursive-descent parser might be the
> > > thing to use.  This way we could specify structure
> > by
> > > use of rules, and Antlr's use of parameters and
> > return
> > > values could allow us to specify a contextual
> > > interpretation to an element, and receive a value
> > by
> > > which to associate it with a parent relational
> > > database record.  Does this sound like a good
> > > approach?  Can anyone offer a better alternative?
> > > 
> > > TIA,
> > > Matt
> > > 
> > > __________________________________
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync
> > to Outlook(TM).
> > > http://calendar.yahoo.com
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
> http://calendar.yahoo.com


 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 




More information about the antlr-interest mailing list