[Lazarus] Parser

[Aleksa Todorovic]

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 09:02, Adem <listmember at letterboxes.org> wrote:
>
>>> [...]
>>> So, could I now ask for some constructive --instead of discouraging--
>>> criticism.
>>
>> The fear of slowing down the compiler and its development without seeing
>> the gain is discouraging.
>
> I do sympathize with those fears; but, as you'll agree, worries about speed
> degradation can only be meaningfully addressed (put to rest) when the actual
> code is available --no amount of talk or assurances can help/change that.
>
> Now, about 'gain':
>
> I think you're overlooking medium/long term benefits.
>

And I believe you are overlooking all problems coming with maintenance
of such solution. I agree that having one parser for all different
kind of usage is solution which would be great to have, but my opinion
is that it should be based on fcl parser, not compiler's one.

And later, IF (whoever does the job) succeeds in making such a good
parser (which gets integrated into, for example, Lazarus and proves to
be well implemented), only then it is time to think how to connect
that parser with compiler's one. At least, that's how I see this
situation.


> When you turn the parser into a module (for the purposes of usage
> downstream, in IDE etc.), what you will have actually done is to make that
> 'parser module' replaceable too.
>
> That alone can be worth its weight in gold, in the sense that from then on,
> you can use other 'parser module's --such as, you name it, 'C module',
> 'Modula module', 'Java module' etc. etc.
>
> And, that expands horizons, brings in more talent.
>
> Which cannot be bad for FPC, can it?


It all sounds really nice, doesn't it :-)



>
> Cheers,
>
> Adem
>
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Lazarus mailing list
> Lazarus at lists.lazarus.freepascal.org
> http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
>