std.d.lexer : voting thread

Jacob Carlborg doob at me.com
Sun Oct 6 01:59:57 PDT 2013


On 2013-10-05 20:45, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

> I don't understand this question.
>
>> I think we can have both. A hand written lexer, specifically targeted for
>> D that is very fast. Then a more general lexer that can be used for many languages.
>
> I agree with Artur that this is a fallacy.

I never said that the generated one would be slow. I only said that the 
hand written would be fast :)

>> I have to say I think this is a bit unfair to dump this huge thing in the
>> voting thread. You haven't made a single post in the discussion thread
>> and now you're coming with this big suggestions in the voting thread.
>
> The way I see it it's unfair of you to claim that. All I did was to vote
> and to explain that vote. I was very explicit I don't want to pull rank or
> anything. Besides it was an idea and such things are hard to time.
>
> I think std.d.lexer is a fine product that works as advertised. But I also
> believe very strongly that it doesn't exploit D's advantages and that
> adopting it would lock us into a suboptimal API. I have strengthened this
> opinion only since yesterday morning.

I just think that if you were not completely satisfied with the current 
API or implementation you could have said so in the discussion thread. 
It would have at least given Brian a chance to do something about it, 
before the voting began.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list