[Lazarus] Parser

[Adem]

  On 2010-07-01 20:26, Reimar Grabowski wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Jul 2010 20:12:52 +0300
> Adem<listmember at letterboxes.org>  wrote:
>> Even though these can come across as nothing to do with Lazarus, they
>> actually are --if you consider the fact that here in Lazarus list people
>> are focused on writing applications, i.e. not compiler develeopment,
>> anything that can expand/help with that purpose belongs to this list's
>> very domain.
> http://techbuddha.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/double-facepalm.jpg
I am sorry, I didn't think that paragraph would be that unparseable 
--can I have a copy of the error log. :)
>>> Is it possible to continue the discussion somewhere else, please?
>> Personally, I'd think it'd be mistake to do that.
> The FPC lists are the correct place to discuss FPC topics. Enough of them there, user/devel/other choose one.
Thank you for displaying just the the kind of community spirit I like 
whereby each and every member thinks the whole belongs to him/her as 
his/her personal lawn.

By that token, you --just as anybody else-- can tell me off your 
personal lawn; can't you?

Of course, you can. After all, you own this place. ;)
>> I would, OTOH, very much appreciate if you could spare some time and
>> contribute towards future direction.
> No problem. Keep the compiler/parser as it is (this means fast and working).
Order <> Contribution.
> Enhance the parser fpdoc uses =>  win
> Enhace h2pas for better automatic header translation =>  double win
And, do those all over every time some little thing changes --for ever 
and ever.

I see.

How about this as a more sensible approach:

Refactor the FPC code so that its relevant modules are usable in the 
above applications (and more).

Further: While doing that, refactor it so that ordinary mortals too 
could comprehend it better to off-load some of the immense burdens on 
the shoulders of the Core team.

Add to that: In the process, rearrange a few things so that future 
expansion --such as multilanguage compilation etc.-- becomes a tangible 
possibility.

Such an awful idea, isn't it?

What I find interesting and yet dismaying is this: You choose not to 
have any input (like "how about doing XXX also, while you're at it?) 
other than "get off my lawn!"..

Cheers,

Adem