[antlr-interest] Re: Translators Should Use Tree Grammars

[micheal_jor]

--- In antlr-interest at yahoogroups.com, "atripp54321" <atripp at c...> wrote:
> 
> Anakreon,
> Thanks again for the input. Just a few comments.
> 
> > I think the domain is source->source translation.
> 
> After all this discussion, I'm starting to think of my thing
> as at a bit higher-level than other translators (at least
> ASPA).

<SNIP>

> So I'd like to call my thing a "language rewriter" rather than
> "language translator". Where "rewrite" here means "This C
> code is a mess, let's rewrite it in Java", not "term rewriting".

<SNIP>

> Yea, good point. Now I tend to think that my problem with
> treewalkers is just due to my (possibly unique) approach.
> As I mentioned elsewhere, perhaps my "translator" is functioning
> more like a natural language translator.

Andy,

This paper offers some insight into some of the techniques used in the
field:

   A Survey of Strategies in Rule-Based Program Transformation Systems
   by Eelco Visser (pub. 2004)
     -- http://www.cs.uu.nl/~visser/ftp/Vis04-survey.pdf

ANTLR's tree grammar approach is included. For those too busy too read
it all, tree parsers are noted as not supporting the separation of
[tranformation] rules,  [rule application] strategies and generic tree
traversals.

Cheers!

Micheal
ANTLR/C#





 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/antlr-interest/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    antlr-interest-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

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