[antlr-interest] Serious doubts on usage of incremental parsinginides

[Prashant Deva]

john,

> Depends on how tightly you need/want to constrain the synchronization of
> the various views.
> 
exactly, so if u have to update everything else so late only, then why
run an incremental parser. why not run a batch parser?


> For some situations, people do really want the system to be extremely
> strict.  Though, in most of those cases that come immediately to mind,
> the interface is relatively simple.
> 
> Of course, in those really strict cases, I don't know that I'd call them
> incremental parsers as much as I'd call them extremely constrained
> editors.
> 

You dont seem to get the meaning of an 'incremental parser'. an
incremental parser is one which will produce exactly the same output
as that of a batch parser but it parses just the modifications and
leaves the rest of the stuff as is.
Thus a good incremental parser (like mine ;) ) should allow an
unrestricted editing model and should recover from errors eaxctly as a
batch parser would.

Jean,

>Back to our discussion, have you any clue how IDE are handling >the
>drawing of UI element without "blocking" the user on the >event-thread ?

No idea. I am still looking at the source of eclipse. They have got a
custom implementation of almost every SWT widget, which is super
complex!

PRASHANT

On 4/26/05, John D. Mitchell <johnm-antlr at non.net> wrote:
> >>>>> "Prashant" == Prashant Deva <prashant.deva at gmail.com> writes:
> [...]
> 
> > So here is my problem stated once again - You can't run an incremental
> > parser on every keystroke cause no matter how fast the parser is, the
> > amount of 'other' stuff to update will slow the editor.
> 
> Depends on how tightly you need/want to constrain the synchronization of
> the various views.
> 
> [...]
> > So what's the use of an incremental parser.
> 
> For some situations, people do really want the system to be extremely
> strict.  Though, in most of those cases that come immediately to mind,
> the interface is relatively simple.
> 
> Of course, in those really strict cases, I don't know that I'd call them
> incremental parsers as much as I'd call them extremely constrained
> editors.
> 
> Take care,
>         John
>