Looking for champion - std.lang.d.lex

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Nick Sabalausky" <a at a.a> wrote in message 
news:ia01sk$1i7s$1 at digitalmars.com...
> "Nick Sabalausky" <a at a.a> wrote in message 
> news:ia01q3$1i1a$1 at digitalmars.com...
>> "Walter Bright" <newshound2 at digitalmars.com> wrote in message 
>> news:i9vn3l$bd1$2 at digitalmars.com...
>>> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>>> What's wrong with regexes?
>>>
>>> They don't handle recursion.
>>
>> Neither do plain-old strings. But regexes will get you farther than plain 
>> strings before needing to resort to customized lexing.
>>
>> But I'm a big data-driven fan anyway. If you're not than I can see why it 
>> wouldn't seem as appealing as it does to me.
>>
>> In any case, if I have a chance I might see about adapting my Goldie ( 
>> www.dsource.org/projects/goldie ) library to more Phobos-friendly 
>> requirements. It's already a fully-usable lexer/parser (and the 
>> lexer/parser parts can be used independantly), with a complete grammar 
>> description language and I already have misc related tools written. And 
>> it's mostly working on D2 already (just need the next DMD because it has 
>> a fix for a bug that's a breaker for one of the tools). So if I can get 
>> it into a state more suitable for Phobos then that might end up putting 
>> things ahead of where they would be if someone just started from scratch. 
>> The initial versions might not be completely Phobos-ified, but it could 
>> definitely get there (especially if I had some guidance from people with 
>> more Phobos2 experience than me). Would Walter & co be interested in 
>> this? If not, I won't bother, but if so, then I may give it a shot.
>>
>
> And FWIW, I was already thnking about making some improvements to Goldie's 
> API enyway.
>

But that's all if you want generalized lexing or parsing though. If you just 
want "lexing D code"/"parsing D code", then IMO anything other than adapting 
parts of DDMD would be the wrong way to go.