Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> Currently, the tokeniser and the lexer are a combined entity.
Yes, in the vast majority of languages; so people get used to thinking
that it has to be this way.
> my preferred solution would be to have the tokenizer,
> lexer and parser as a single, hand-crafted LR(k) m
[Warning - mailing list violently altered!]
John Carter wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2000, John Porter wrote:
>
> > As a concrete example, perl's data structures are always
> > managed in memory; while things like sort and merge have
> > been written to utilize on-disk buffers when necessary.
> > (H
On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 06:53:47PM +1100, Jeremy Howard wrote:
> Leon Brocard wrote:
> > Hmmm, I wonder what kind of subset would be necessary - surely the
> > most useful constructs are also the most complicated...
>
> We could learn quite a bit by looking through the code from
> Parse::RecDescen
Leon Brocard wrote:
> Bradley M. Kuhn sent the following bits through the ether:
>
> > It should be noted that in Larry's speech on Friday, he said that he
wanted
> > to write the Lexer and Parser for Perl in some subset of Perl. :)
>
> Is there a writeup somewhere for those who couldn't attend?
