From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 870D9BBAF for ; Thu, 23 Apr 2009 01:12:15 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhoBAKdA70nUnwdkjWdsb2JhbACCHpQkAQEBAQkJCgkPBrlug3QGh2Y X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,431,1233529200"; d="scan'208";a="28124589" Received: from relay.pcl-ipout02.plus.net ([212.159.7.100]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 23 Apr 2009 01:12:15 +0200 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApMFAGZB70nUnw4R/2dsb2JhbACCHs5Rg3QGh2Y Received: from pih-relay04.plus.net ([212.159.14.17]) by relay.pcl-ipout02.plus.net with ESMTP; 23 Apr 2009 00:12:14 +0100 Received: from [87.115.105.35] (helo=leper.local) by pih-relay04.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1Lwlby-00071f-GA; Thu, 23 Apr 2009 00:12:14 +0100 From: Jon Harrop Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr, mainland@eecs.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [Caml-list] quasiquoting: 3 parsers for camlp4 vs 1 for haskell? Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 00:19:09 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200904230019.09216.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Plusnet-Relay: 39ca8f7a8dda61e8ffaa937f709e5155 X-Spam: no; 0.00; parsers:01 camlp:01 haskell:01 camlp:01 parser:01 syntax:01 ocaml:01 parsers:01 afaict:01 syntax:01 2009:98 mainland:98 frog:98 wrote:01 wrote:01 On Friday 17 April 2009 19:24:31 Joel Reymont wrote: > From the quasiquoting paper by Geoffrey Mainland [1], page 7: > > "The major advantage of our approach over that of camlp4 > is that we demonstrate how to use generic programming > to reuse a single parser to parse quasiquoted patterns, > quasiquoted expressions and plain syntax that does not > include antiquotes. Because OCaml does not support generic > programming out of the box, I have no idea what he meant by this. > in camlp4 this would require three separate parsers, AFAICT, that was not true when he wrote it (Sept 2007) and is not true today. > each generating different representations of the same concrete syntax." That has never been true. > Can someone shed light on how, where and why three different > parsers are required for camlp4? I've CC'd the author. Perhaps he can shed some light on this. -- Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e