From: Pierre Weis <pierre.weis@inria.fr>
To: Luc.Maranget@inria.fr (Luc Maranget)
Cc: jgoerzen@complete.org, caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocamllex/yacc and camlp4
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 00:48:01 +0200 (MET DST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200406162248.AAA11976@pauillac.inria.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040616085616.B26623@beaune.inria.fr> from Luc Maranget at "Jun 16, 104 08:56:16 am"
Hi,
> > Quick question: why are ocamllex and ocamlyacc not implemented with
> > camlp4? They seem to be doing exactly what camlp4 is there for, and I
> > think would serve as great camlp4 examples (plus being able to extend
> > *their* syntax could be very powerful indeed.)
> >
> > Thanks,
> > John
>
> Hello,
>
> First there is history, ocamllex and ocamlyacc predate camlp4, thus
> they were not written with camlp4 initially.
>
> Second there is bootstrap. Since the lexer and parser of ocamlc itself
> are written with ocamllex/ocamlyacc, Making these tools to depend on
> camlp4 would include camlp4 in the bootstrap cycle of ocamlc.
> The resulting situation would complicate bootstraping ocamlc.
>
> Of course there could be camlp4 versions of ocamllex/ocamlyacc in
> addition to ocamllex/ocamlyacc versions of ocamllex/ocamlyacc. Well,
> nobody ever thought about doing that, I guess.
>
> -- Luc Maranget
I would add two points to Luc's answer:
1) ocamllex and ocamlyacc implementation technologies are damned fast
and it is difficult to compete with them using streams.
2) Semantics differences between Yacc and functionnal parsing are
large and complex, so that implementing the precise Yacc semantics
with its reduce/reduce and shift/reduce conflicts and the default
conflicts resolution that Yacc also implements could not be a trivial
task.
Last but not least, the actual ocamllex/ocamlyacc implementations work
pretty well, so that there is no clear necessity to rewrite them.
In conclusion: pure Camlp4 implementation of ocamllex/ocamlyacc is
still an interesting and challenging progamming task for the next few
years, if you (or someone else) had the will and time to provide two
``great camlp4 examples'' to the rest of us...
Happy hacking :)
Pierre Weis
INRIA, Projet Cristal, Pierre.Weis@inria.fr, http://pauillac.inria.fr/~weis/
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-06-16 22:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-06-16 3:26 John Goerzen
2004-06-16 6:56 ` Luc Maranget
2004-06-16 22:48 ` Pierre Weis [this message]
2004-06-17 2:04 ` William Lovas
2004-06-17 9:42 ` skaller
2004-06-17 6:46 ` Alain Frisch
2004-06-17 9:36 ` skaller
2004-06-17 1:44 ` Shawn Wagner
2004-06-29 7:34 ` [Caml-list] Startconditions in ocamllex oliver
2004-06-29 8:00 ` Luc Maranget
2004-06-30 7:45 ` Hendrik Tews
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200406162248.AAA11976@pauillac.inria.fr \
--to=pierre.weis@inria.fr \
--cc=Luc.Maranget@inria.fr \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=jgoerzen@complete.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox