[antlr-interest] Re: how useful would a generic grammar "action" language be?

[Arnar Birgisson]

Hello..

> Totally.  Sorry for the lack of clarity.  I would abstract a 
> generic statement/
> expression language from the C derivatives and then call that 
> the language.  I was 
> merely showing off my internal form.  So assignment would be
> 
> a = b;
> 
> etc...  No pointers probably.  I'd call them 
> object-references instead and do away with 
> the '*' so they look like smalltalk, java, C#, etc...
> 
> Anyway, it would look like legal code for most common 
> languages, but would actually 
> be translated specifically to the target by ANTLR. :)
> Ter

How would the user clarify to ANTLR whether he/she is writing their
actions in the target language, or the abstract action language?

Having grammars with actions and all (even just the simple ones) would
be very cool, and it would help out alot when people distribute grammars
and/or use grammars from others. But if the implementation of this would
mean alot of work, is it worth it?

Arnar


 

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