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=1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20881BC6B for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:56:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail8.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail8.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.10]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l3RFucuS010148 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:56:41 +0200 Received: (qmail 26734 invoked from network); 27 Apr 2007 15:56:33 -0000 Received: from shell2.sea5.speakeasy.net ([69.17.116.3]) (envelope-sender ) by mail8.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 27 Apr 2007 15:56:33 -0000 Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 08:56:33 -0700 (PDT) From: brogoff To: OCaml List Cc: Francois Pottier Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Bug in ocamlyacc In-Reply-To: <20070424143258.GA12596@yquem.inria.fr> Message-ID: References: <001401c785f3$3af5e890$6a7ba8c0@treble> <1177392571.10100.46.camel@rosella.wigram> <20070424143258.GA12596@yquem.inria.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 46321D36.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; bug:01 ocamlyacc:01 ocaml:01 ocamlyacc:01 2007,:98 wrote:01 compile:01 caml-list:01 speakeasy:01 pottier:01 grammar:01 output:02 francois:02 size:95 brian:04 On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Francois Pottier wrote: > There are at least two reasons why Menhir isn't (yet) shipped with ocaml. > First, it produces code which is significantly larger than ocamlyacc's > tables. This might be a problem for some people, so we should add an option to > produce tables instead of code. Hi, That would be my preference in terms of prioritization of work for Menhir, to get it to output table driven code. I tried converting a decent sized grammar (verilog 95 with some later stuff in it) from ocamlyacc to menhir a few months ago and it was completely painless, but I did notice that the compile time and code size for menhir were much greater. I like where it's going, and even though I'm not a huge fan of yacc, it is quite compatible AND has addressed some deficiencies of yacc. That is a huge bonus for me. -- Brian