[antlr-interest] anybody get bitten by ANTLR's AST
parrt at cs.usfca.edu
Thu Jan 19 12:15:37 PST 2006
On Jan 19, 2006, at 11:06 AM, O.E. Dragon wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 10:53:51 -0500
> Andy Tripp <antlr at jazillian.com> wrote:
>> Also, I'd get rid of all the antlr.collections stuff and ASTIterator
>> and ASTPair and use
>> use the standard collections and generics.
> I don't know for sure but wouldn't that cause a backwards
> problem if people need to use a Java 1.4 compiler. Otherwise I
> completely agree.
Oh, right. Yeah, i won't be using generics...don't need 'em.
> In particular there's a number of things that would be much easier for
> me if TokenTypes was an enum type instead of an int. I don't
> suppose it
> would be too difficult to have ANTLR v3 output both Java 1.4 and Java
> 1.5, seeing as the new ST-based translation back-end appears to be
not a problem. Just a subgroup of the main Java template group. I'm
using this very example in my ST paper.
> I'd be up to the task of writing the ST templates for Java 1.5 if
> Terence's plan was to only do 1.4. But then the problem of having the
> ANTLR library using 1.4 or 1.5 could become an issue.
Ah. That is true.
> About the AST interface, I wouldn't say I got "bitten hard" by it, but
> I started using it and quickly noticed it was too restrictive. I
> basically ended up subclassing CommonAST and use that subclass
> everywhere because there were a lot of added methods that weren't part
> of the interface, which I couldn't access by declaring variables as
Ok, well, seems like Object as the AST type is pretty useful then.
I'll leave it.
More information about the antlr-interest