[antlr-interest] Parse tree in the debugger

[Loring Craymer]

Andy--

The protocol is not so simple that it can be specified in a short email (lots of message types), and even the RMI approach you suggest would involve a comprehensive redesign.

--Loring



----- Original Message ----
> From: Andy Tripp <antlr at jazillian.com>
> To: Loring Craymer <lgcraymer at yahoo.com>
> Cc: antlr mailing list <antlr-interest at antlr.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 10:54:55 AM
> Subject: Re: [antlr-interest] Parse tree in the debugger
> 
> Yes, a DSL can be trivial, but not using a DSL can be even more trivial.
> If it takes just days to create a DSL, it might take just seconds to just "hack 
> it".
> 
> The "protocol" might be something so simple that it could be described in a
> sentence or two, or as trivial data structure or two. I have no idea
> how simple the ANTLR/Antlrworks interface is, but if it can be described
> in email that's shorter than this one, a DSL is overkill, IMO.
> 
> And even if it's a non-trivial interface, a DSL might not be the simplest/
> most maintainable solution. Just having a couple of methods like:
> 
> ANTLRInfo getANTLRInfo(SomeCriteria p);
> void sendANTLRInfo(SomethingElse p);
> 
> ...and using RMI might be the easiest. No DSL, no parsing engine, no
> validation. Just passing around simple Java objects.
> 
> DSLs have their place, but they're not the best solution in a lot of cases,
> like trivial communications within or between Java programs.
> 
> Andy
> 
> Loring Craymer wrote:
> > Andy--
> > 
> > DSLs can be extraordinarily simple; in this case, the solution could be "spend 
> a couple of days codifying (and writing the language processor in a couple of 
> hours--as I said, simple) the output" or adopting Gerald's suggestion (if it 
> covers the profiling output--which it might).  Right now, the protocol is in an 
> "it just grew" state where it is probably easier to do a quick re-design rather 
> than repeated patching.  Sometimes, you just need to find out what you have 
> done, do it right, and move on.
> > 
> > Besides, if you are only using ANTLR for heavy-duty translators, you are 
> unlikely even to be building those efficiently; constructing small DSLs for 
> automation can markedly decrease development time.  It's all about good design 
> practice.
> > 
> > --Loring