[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [cdt-dev] Question about parser
|
> cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 10/03/2004 10:14:32 PM:
>
> > Current implementation of parser does not provide complete model. For
> > example, parser processes statements and resolves/collects references,
> > reports about syntax problems. But it does not collect information about
>
> > statements, there are no corresponding AST classes, and requester
> > interface doesn't have callback methods for statements processing,
> > aren't there?.
>
> Correct, there have been numerous threads on cdt-dev & cdt-core-dev
> concerning this.
> Doug is defining a new set of AST interfaces that we shall start to
> migrate our
> parsing framework towards in the AST2 branch. Also, Jason Brown has been
> doing his
> own exploration in this area in his environment. It should not be a
> surprise that
> the current parser does not provide statement-level granularity in the
> AST.
>
> > I realize well that this functionality is not required
> > for the tasks that use parser service now. Working on code formatter
> > implementation I tried where it was possible to subclass parser classes
> > in order to get desired behavior. So far it did not required essential
> > efforts.
>
> I still do not understand how you get this to work purely through
> subclassing and substitution. What parse mode do you use? How do you
> rewrite the source?
>
> > In this case I could also follow the same way. Before doing
> > that, I just was wandering about plans of parser development. I found
> > out in new ast2 branch packages named "dom" (now empty).
>
> "dom" is from CDT 1.1. Everything new is also included in the "parser"
> source folder.
>
> > If we should
> > expect to see this stuff soon, it would be a wast of time to torture
> > existing parser in order to compel it to do the things it cannot do now.
>
>
> To be honest, I was suprised to hear that you were trying to use the
> parser to do source code formatting. In previous conference calls it was
> suggested (by Rockwell Collins I believe) that the short-term solution
> for this would be to integrate external code formatters/pretty printers
> into
> a framework.
>
> We do not plan to merge AST2 back into the HEAD until we have migrated as
> many of
> our clients as possible to how the parsing framework is supposed to work.
> Our focus
> now is on restructuring the architecture, and this will take some time
> (most likely
> towards the end of the year).
>
I think, this issue was clarify in a previous posting (by Alex).
Current:
CDT-2.1 will(hopefully) have a framework that will allow folks/ISV to plugin any formatters.
Core and part of the UI is in the head .. i.e the C Editor will try
create the CodeFormatter/ToolFactory.
Future(not in the plan):
Alex is also exploring different avenues for a pure Java C/C++ formatter.
One of the avenue, I'm guessing 8-), is to use the AST(2).