develooper Front page | perl.bootstrap | Postings from July 2000

Re: LALR (was Re: Working Group Proposal)

Kurt D. Starsinic
July 24, 2000 10:08
Re: LALR (was Re: Working Group Proposal)
Message ID:
On Mon, Jul 24, 2000 at 12:43:09PM -0400, Joshua N Pritikin wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2000 at 12:34:19PM -0400, wrote:
> > horos wrote:
> > > LALR would be awesome, I would even say essential. It strikes at the heart of 
> > > the complaint people have of perl being a 'messy' language, puts it on the the 
> > > same playing field as Java and Python.
> > 
> > That would tantamount to Perl (aka Larry, aka the Perl community) saying, 
> > "We were wrong, Java and Python were right."  But we weren't wrong.
> Why can't perl ultimately support multiple syntax conventions?  Why
> can't the lexer/parser be pluggable?

    Why are you calling for a yacc interpreter?  The lexer/parser _could_
be pluggable, and this _might_ be a feature of the implementation, but why
would you have this be a requirement of perl6 _per se_?

* Kurt Starsinic ( ---------- Senior Network Engineer *
|      `It is always possible to aglutenate multiple separate problems      |
|       into a single complex interdependent solution.  In most cases       |
|       this is a bad idea.' - Ross Callon                                  | Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About