[antlr-interest] Re: [stringtemplate-interest] $r.st vs $r.template

Terence Parr parrt at cs.usfca.edu
Tue Nov 22 22:26:14 PST 2005


On Nov 22, 2005, at 10:10 PM, Laurent Vaucher wrote:

>>
>> So are you saying short is good or bad?  I'm leaning now  
>> towards .template again.
>>
>
>   Well, I don't have an a priori opinion. What I wanted to say was  
> that for something that is not used very often, the long explicit  
> name is the good choice (no need for a lookup in the manual, the  
> name says it all). But if it is something that appears in every  
> rule for a translation grammar, I think it will feel heavy  
> (everything is already in the reader's short-term memory, so  
> there's no need for a long descriptive name).

A very good point.  Damn, just when I was convinced that .template  
was right.  .st looks wrong but it is really long to type and believe  
me, you'll use it in every rule...

Ter


More information about the antlr-interest mailing list