[antlr-interest] Re: .Net

[Daniel Gackle]

Mike's comment:

> Java is nice, but my tools have to run on .Net or no one is
> interested in them. Such is my world.

... applies to my situation as well. I've been out of the ANTLR loop for
awhile and didn't know about the J# port. It's fortunate for me, because it
opens up the possibility of something I've wanted to do for some time, which
is write an ANTLR grammar for a modeling language that is part of the
product we're building. (Currently the models are written in XML, which is
ugly.)

Micheal's comment:

> All you need is the appropriate runtime library for your chosen target
language

... is technically correct of course, but the concern in my case is more
political. It would be hard for me to convince my team to introduce a
dependency on Java, even if it were only for generating (not running) a
parser.  It is the grammar (not the generated parser) that would be
considered our source code, since it's the grammar (not the parser) that we
write and maintain. Our build system would therefore have to run the parser
generator as part of the build, and it is a lot easier for me to convince
people this is good if it doesn't introduce any new dependencies. Mike, I'd
be curious to know if your situation is similar.

Daniel


 

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