[antlr-interest] Re: I Can't decide between GOLD or ANTLR

[Alexey Demakov]

I've seen your first message but I didn't use GOLD, so can't compare.
I've read GOLD docs and this is my resume:
1. GOLD uses LR (well, LALR) when ANTLR uses LL. It seems to me that 
ANTLR has more power for difficult cases, but many real program languages
can be LR-parsed using GOLD. Theoretically LR parsers are faster, but specific 
implementation should be benchmarked.
2. GOLD grammars separated from actions and may be more portable than  ANTLR parsers.
3. GOLD grammars seems to be more readable than ANTLR's. It's good.
4. "Rules are written using standard Backus-Naur Form. Since the GOLD Parser 
users the LALR algorithm, rather than LL Parsing,  there are no limitations on the format 
of a grammar. You can write rules that best suite your needs rather than worrying 
about such things as eliminating right-recursion."
This sentence from GOLD site is not clear for me.

I repeat that I didn't use GOLD and you should not rely on my opinion.
But may be this list helps you.

Regards,
Alexey
-----
TreeDL: Tree Description Language: http://treedl.sourceforge.net
RedVerst Group: http://www.unitesk.com


> I looked at both products. Both have advantages and disadvantages 
> over each other. GOLDParser would allow us to use C# (like ANTLR), 
> but also a few others like VBN.
> 
> I was hoping for good advice. All I got was "RTFM!"
> 
>  
> > If you have to ask, the only reasonable response is "RTFM!".  Even
> > cursory analysis gives a very clear answer.
> > 
> > --Loring



 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/antlr-interest/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    antlr-interest-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

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