[antlr-interest] Antlr v4 - C++ target

Richard Gildea rgildea at gmail.com
Tue Jan 10 17:44:11 PST 2012


Hi Sam,

Thanks for the info!

Richard

On 10 January 2012 16:22, Sam Harwell <sam at tunnelvisionlabs.com> wrote:

> Hi Richard,
>
> I wouldn't expect a C++ version of ANTLR 4 within the next 12 months. The
> Java target and ANTLRWorks 2 are both still pre-alpha. I'm not planning to
> start the C# target until a release candidate of v4 is available, and the
> C#
> target will involve ports of the runtime, the tool, and potentially
> integration of some ANTLRWorks 2 features into Visual Studio. After that is
> working I'll start the C++ port.
>
> I'm confident that under standard usage the C++ port will reduce memory to
> about 10-15% of what 3.4 currently requires. Using templates and a custom
> token type, it should be possible to cut that down to <5% of what 3.4
> requires.
>
> --
> Sam Harwell
> Owner, Lead Developer
> http://tunnelvisionlabs.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Gildea [mailto:rgildea at gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 5:19 PM
> To: antlr-interest at antlr.org
> Subject: [antlr-interest] Antlr v4 - C++ target
>
> Hi,
>
> These are mainly questions for Terrence/Sam Harwell (who I believe will be
> writing the C++ target):
>
> 1) Is there even a vague estimate of when a likely C++ target is likely to
> be available for v4 (even an alpha/beta version)? Is it likely to be on the
> scale of e.g. 2-3 month, 4-6 months, 6 months-1 year, 1 year+?
>
> 2) Is the C++ target expected to have a much lower memory footprint than
> the
> current v3.4 C target?
>
> After recently realising that the v3.4 C target has a largish memory
> footprint (see my recent emails to the list), there has been some pressure
> among some of my co-developers to move to a handwritten parser over ANTLR
> (especially from those who were suspicious of using ANTLR from the start)
> in
> order to reduce the memory usage. Our parser is required to read files as
> large as 0.5 Gb, hence the pressure to keep memory usage as low as
> possible.
>
> It sounds like v4 will likely be a big improvement over v3.4, and I think
> knowing the answers to the above questions could influence whether or not
> we
> move away from ANTLR with our parser.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
> List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest
> Unsubscribe:
> http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address
>
>


More information about the antlr-interest mailing list