Hello everyone, Please review the updated version of my proposal. I also want to ask that does the block header parsing tool need to have support for python2.7?
Proposal Link: https://aru31.github.io/gsoc-proposal.pdf Github Repository Link: https://github.com/aru31/GSoC-Proposal Thanks. Regards, Arpit Gupta On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 7:54 PM Arpit Gupta <guptarpit1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello everyone, > Thanks for the detailed review. > I have made changes to my proposal, as per the discussion in the previous > emails and also included the timeline changes. > Please review the updated version of my proposal. > As a precursor to the actual project, I experimented with a rudimentary > prototype of a parser for C++ header files using Pygccxml, which can be > found at https://github.com/aru31/parser-prototype > > Proposal Link: https://aru31.github.io/gsoc-proposal.pdf > Github Repository Link: https://github.com/aru31/GSoC-Proposal > Thanks > > Regards, > Arpit Gupta > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:05 PM Arpit Gupta <guptarpit1...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Nicolas and Martin, >> >> Thank you again for answering all my queries. >> I will definitely make the changes suggested in the timeline. >> By "both the tools", I meant that there would be an option to use any one >> of the following parsers. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Regards, >> Arpit Gupta >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 10:53 PM Martin Braun <martin.br...@ettus.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 03:36:21PM +0530, Arpit Gupta wrote: >>> > Happy Holi everyone (holi is an Indian festival of colors) >>> > >>> > Thank you Nicolas for your valuable response >>> > >>> > I understood all your points and will surely make changes in the >>> proposal. >>> > >>> > The tools here I referred are both pygccxml and libclang. >>> > >>> > There is trade off for both the tools:- >>> > >>> > 1). Pygccxml takes up a quite a bit of computation time while >>> libclang is >>> > better in this case. >>> > >>> > 2). Pygccxml is quite mature and also has a proper documentation >>> which >>> > gives it advantage over libclang. >>> > >>> > 3). Pygccxml generates a nice AST which is really understandable >>> and easy >>> > to work with while this is not the case in libclang. >>> > >>> > 4). Still libclang is really popular C++ parsing tool and is under >>> > continuous development which gives us an excellent opportunity to >>> explore >>> > it. >>> > >>> > So, I think itâ**s worth it to use both of them to parse header >>> files. >>> > >>> > I definitely know that the most important part of the project is >>> about >>> > extracting most of the information from the header files, but I >>> thought >>> > that the ultimate goal is to create YAML files for the GRC. I will >>> > definitely make these changes and Iâ**m really sorry for the >>> confusion >>> > created due to this in the proposal. >>> > >>> > So, Should I proceed using both the tools? >>> >>> Do you mean, use both tools at the same time, or have an option to use >>> either tool? >>> >>> -- M >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discuss-gnuradio mailing list >>> Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org >>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio >>> >>
_______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
