On Jul 19, 9:34 pm, llothar <llot...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On 19 Jul., 12:53, lee <cogn...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > I will post here even though my message is specific to SmartEiffel.
> > But, alas, the SmartEiffel mailing list link is broken. Anyway, I
> > would like to build an Eiffel language parser using only SmartEiffel.
> > I noticed that the tools directory of the 2.2 and 2.3 builds have a
> > parser.e file. Is there anyone who can point me in the directioin of
> > how the tools use this deferred class to implement an actual parser?
> > Thanks.
>
> You need to read the source code carefully. Unfortunately the parser
> is
> impossible to extract as it is not separated from other parts of
> eiffel.
> And it has its very own style (something i never saw before) of
> implementing
> the parser.
>
> But Eiffel is a very nice language and easy to parse, maybe you want
> to write
> your own parser, it shouldn't take more then a week. I learned how to
> hack
> new features to SmallEiffels parser within a day.
>
> Or look at GOBO they also have an Eiffel parser and patch the
> SmallEiffel
> hacks into this.
>
> By the way: Why do you need a parser?
llothar,
You and a couple of other people wrote to ask why I wanted to write an
Eiffel parser, so I will explain. I am writing an embedded system
that uses an interpreted Eiffel-like language for the end user. The
new language is close enough to Eiffel that an Eiffel parser will be
just fine. I am not so concerned about writing the parser as I am
about other issues. My two main issues are as follows: (a) the speed
of the compiled system (i.e., the C code generated by the Eiffel
compiler, not the interpreted new language and (b) the ****tability of
the C code because I cannot predict the hardware/operating system
combinations of the intended users.
I have been following Eiffel since 1996, but have not found a project
suitable for development with it until now. The release of
EiffelStudio under the GPL has alleviated the cost concerns for me, so
I can now evaluate EiffelStudio, SmartEiffel, and GEC on a technical
basis. I originally chose SmartEiffel because of my understanding
that it generates the fastest and smallest code base, which would be
helpful in the embedded world. I also understood that SmartEiffel is
more ****table across new and different environments. My concern with
SmartEiffel results from the perception that (a) new releases tend not
to be backward compatible with older code and (b) the move away from
the ECMA standard, which I understand, means that SmartEiffel would be
more isolated (except for interesting projects like the SmartEiffel
Wrapper Library Collection). Thus, I am torn about which development
environment to use.
In the past, it might have been easy to develop with Gobo and then use
any compiler. But that seems no longer possible with the move to an
ECMA/non-ECMA Eiffel world. It would be great for anyone who has used
both major compilers (i.e., SmartEiffel and EiffelStudio) to comment
about my concerns regarding speed and ****tability. Thanks.
Lee
|
