[antlr-interest] java.g forks

Michael Studman mstudman at gmx.net
Mon Jan 3 13:45:18 PST 2005


Anton,

Glad to see it's getting some use. I'm eager to see what the issues with
the grammar are as I'm also using it in the core of the next version of
Checkstyle.

Jezz,

> >1) Is it generally accepted that Michael Studman's grammar will
become
> core, or
> >is Michael Stahl's grammar that little bit more tasteful (and
flexible)

I don't think there's been a decision either way although I can't recall
anyone stating mine was generally less tasteful or flexible than Stahl's
;)

Seriously though, I've incorporated a few of Stahl's ideas into my
grammar (notably switchable enum/assert keyword support - with opposite
defaults however) so I think they are at least functionally equivalent.
Then it's just a matter of style - which segues nicely into Andy Tripp's
analysis...

I'm not sure if you've seen my response to Andy analysis as they were in
the next month's message thread, so here they are:

http://www.antlr.org/pipermail/antlr-interest/2004-November/009855.
html
http://www.antlr.org/pipermail/antlr-interest/2004-November/009861.
html

> >
> >2) Will the Java1.3 grammar continue, or will a firm decision be made
> soon;
> >that you have one true java.g file again.

I leave that answer to the Antlr illuminati.

> >
> >3) Do you like my pretty diagram :-)

Yeah, they're groovy! I'm sure you saw that one coming.

Michael Studman.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: antlr-interest-bounces at antlr.org [mailto:antlr-interest-
> bounces at antlr.org] On Behalf Of Anton Safonov
> Sent: 03 January 2005 11:12
> To: Jeremy Rayner; antlr-interest at antlr.org
> Subject: Re: [antlr-interest] java.g forks
> 
> Hi,
> In RefactorIT we used Studman's one, but then eventually fixed a
number
> of issues to actually parse real life code.
> Will try to extract those fixes from my notes and post it here
sometime
> next week!
> 
> Anton.
> 
> Jeremy Rayner wrote:
> 
> >Hi there antlr-interest folk,
> >  First a bit of background... I'm currently working on the new
groovy
> grammar
> >( http://groovy.codehaus.org ) and we're looking to replace the
> >existing hand-rolled
> >grammar with a more complete form.
> >
> >  I'm currently looking at the 'java.g' file and it's many cousins,
> trying to
> >establish the best basis upon which to build the groovy grammar.
> >  We have an initial proposal of features added to an early 1.3
grammar,
> >but I feel that moving to a stable 1.5 grammar early on would be of
> benefit
> >to all. (Save the later pain...)
> >
> >  I have noted the excellent work done by Terence, Matt Quail,
> >Michael Stahl and Michael Studman. It does appear that there are
> >currently three live versions of the grammar, with only taste and
> >functionality between them.
> >
> >  Terence very kindly pointed me at this analysis of the two 1.5
grammars
> >by Andy Tripp...
> >  http://www.antlr.org/pipermail/antlr-interest/2004-
> October/009742.html
> >  The vibe I am getting is that Michael Studman's work will become
the
> trunk
> >revision of the java.g file.
> >
> >  It was all getting a little confusing, so I've tried to put the
> >current state of
> >java.g into diagrammatical form.
> >
> >  http://groovy.javanicus.com/java-g.png
> >
> >I guess I've got three questions
> >
> >1) Is it generally accepted that Michael Studman's grammar will
become
> core, or
> >is Michael Stahl's grammar that little bit more tasteful (and
flexible)
> >
> >2) Will the Java1.3 grammar continue, or will a firm decision be made
> soon;
> >that you have one true java.g file again.
> >
> >3) Do you like my pretty diagram :-)
> >
> >
> >Nice to meet you all,
> >
> >jez.
> >
> >P.S. As a footnote, I tried to create a Java1.5 language recognizer
> >myself using
> >Metsker's bpwj API and the preview JLSv3 spec last month (
> >http://tinyurl.com/46ugp )
> >It is amazing how much of the syntax chapter of the JLS is no longer
> >implementable,
> >instead it appears that since JLSv2 the syntax in chapter18 is a mix
> >of implementable
> >grammar and exposition grammar.  I've lodged a few specific issues
> >with their feedback
> >forms, I hope Sun takes the time to ensure that JLSv3 chapter 18 is
> >complete + correct.
> >
> >
> 
> ---
> 
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.825 / Virus Database: 563 - Release Date: 30/12/2004
> 

---

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.825 / Virus Database: 563 - Release Date: 30/12/2004
 



More information about the antlr-interest mailing list