[Lazarus] Using FPC parser/tokenizer for code formatting

[Marco van de Voort]

On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 07:05:31PM +0300, Adem wrote:
> > That doesn't mean the various parsers could be better synchronized, and I
> > think something can be done there.  But I think it would yield more to
> > integrating fcl-passrc into the testsuite, and thus document the boundery
> > conditions of implemented constructs.
> >    
> Other than some historical accident, what can be the point of 
> writing/maintaining various parsers while there is the true blood parser 
> right inside the compiler engine.

The point is that two separate parsers are probably easier and cheaper to
maintain than one integrated one that has to forfill all _different_
requirements for the individual parsers.
 
> I mean, if I'd suggested a slightly different version of TList, I am 
> sure I'd be given thr tar and feathera treatment for attempting to 
> duplicate an already existing class for no major gain. Yet, there seems 
> to be more than one (each half-baked to various degrees) parsers lying 
> around.

Well, the problem is that anything can be made to look easier by layering
one layer simplifications over the next.

If everything was as simple as the identifying the base principle, we would
have fusion-power for about a century now. Unfortunately, often the
implemnetation details make something non trivial.