[antlr-interest] Big grammar => static initializer/method size is exceeding the 65535 bytes limit

[Jim Idle]

Guys - you are asking for the wrong problem to be fixed (at least of the three of you, at least two will be ;-). Try the new -X options, then look at splitting your grammar into multiple import grammars, then start taking out huge predicates such as (expression)=> or generally (rule)=>. You can stop anywhere along that path if you do not feel that optimizing the grammar is something worth your while and the first and/or second options make the DFA table size issue go away.

There are cases where big DFAs become inevitable, and then you should definitely look at the import capability, which will prevent a single parser class being used for everything and allow you to manage what goes in which class at the grammar level.

Jim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: antlr-interest-bounces at antlr.org [mailto:antlr-interest-
> bounces at antlr.org] On Behalf Of Renee Luo
> Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 6:45 AM
> To: Antlr interest
> Subject: Re: [antlr-interest] Big grammar => static initializer/method
> size is exceeding the 65535 bytes limit
> 
> Yes, we are trying to migrate our ANTLR2 grammar to ANTLR2, we are also
> facing this problem. If the static initialize code will be separated
> from parser_class, That's will be great for us.
> 
> Renee
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: antlr-interest-bounces at antlr.org [mailto:antlr-interest-
> bounces at antlr.org] On Behalf Of Andreas Meyer
> Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 8:32 AM
> To: Antlr interest
> Subject: Re: [antlr-interest] Big grammar => static initializer/method
> size is exceeding the 65535 bytes limit
> 
> Back in the days when we tried to migrate our ANTLR2 grammar to ANTLR3,
> we also experienced this problem, due to lots of static initializer
> code
> in the _parser_ class. Our solution was to apply some perl-skript
> magic,
> but if Alex Marin now proposes a built-in solution, that is only good
> for ANTLR.
> 
> Andreas
> 
> Jim Idle schrieb:
> > I think that the issue is more likely something to do with your lexer
> specification. You should not need to worry about having lots of
> keywords, so one of the other rules must be causing the huge expansion.
> For instance I have problems with the complete lexer for TSQL, which
> has more keywords than you can shake a stick at.
> >
> > Did you ever post your complete lexer spec? I was out of the country
> when you first started this thread.
> >
> > Jim
> >
> 
> 
> List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest
> Unsubscribe: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-
> email-address
> 
> This email and its attachments may be confidential and are intended
> solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views
> or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not
> necessarily represent those of ImexSystems Inc.
> If you are not the intended recipient of this email and its
> attachments, you must take no action based upon them, nor must you copy
> or show them to anyone.
> Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email
> in error.
> 
> List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest
> Unsubscribe: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-
> email-address