[antlr-interest] Why no links to ANTLR 3.0 on www.antlr.org??

[Peter Yu]

"Geir Ove Skjaervik" <geiroves at online.no> wrote:

>The way you respond to mr. Blomberg tells me that at your level of
>knowlegde of Parsing and Parser technology you do not any longer
>comprehend the problems beginners are struggling with: You ask questions
>the novice / beginner does NOT know how to answer because (he / she /
>we) are trying to grasp the concept.

That may not be entirely fair; In the United States, at least, those who
majored in Computer Science in the universities have , at the very least,
been introduced to the various terminologies already.

Though, from the way the feedback about beginners' difficulty in
comprehending how some of the things ought to be done, it seems
like ANTLR is now popular enough that those who aren't from a pure
CS background are using the tools as well, so it might be helpful to
at least have a list of references to common practices and such
in the documentation.

Granted, a list of common patterns that people uses during parsing and
interpreting/compiling would be helpful, but entire textbooks are devoted
to such endeavors -- thus, it might not be practical to actually include it 
in
the base set of ANTLR documentation.

My experiences with the documentation was -- short as it was, after I took
about 2-3 hours reading the entire thing, I understood how to do what I
wanted to accomplish with it.  After that, it was mainly fighting with the
"quirks" in the ANTLR syntax and/or code generators that required the
most time, learning-curve wise.

I do have a CS background, though, and have already learned the basics
of parsing and lexing from the classes I took.  So, perhaps I would be an
"intermediate" in the eyes of the "beginners." =)