Thanks for taking a look. User-level bytecode allows me an easier choice to build a JIT or tracing infrastructure, while being far less complex than writing out JVM bytecode during grammar compile.
Christophe has certainly been a help offline with design choices. I wanted PEG, no ambiguity, unlike instaparse or parsnip. Most of the API inspiration was from LPEG & Scala's Parboiled2. Some of the VM internals are close to JRuby's Joni regex engine. On Thursday, November 19, 2015 at 8:24:37 AM UTC-5, bernardH wrote: > > This is interesting ! > It reminds me of Parsnip from C.Grand [0], have you considered it when > desining pex ? As your parser is focusing of characters, I am wondering : > could the operations triggered by the execution of your pex code be simple > enough to warrant actual compiling to JVM bytecode (at run time, with ASM > [1]) for maximum performance ? > > Best Regards, > > Bernard > > [0] https://github.com/cgrand/parsnip/ > [1] http://asm.ow2.org/ > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
