From: Noel O'B. <bao...@gm...> - 2010-01-31 17:48:14
|
Your approach sounds like a cleaner way to do it and I am aware of another parser that is similar. I will be interested to see whether such an approach stands the test of time. However I think it is unlikely that we will rewrite all of our parsers at this stage as I am confident that our parsers are very robust. Fixing bugs just takes a few minutes, as we have an extensive test suite of 100 or more files submitted by users. I'm curious though - why did you write your own parser instead of using the existing one in cclib? - Noel On 26 January 2010 17:20, Mark Monroe <mo...@oc...> wrote: > Dear cclib developers, > > Have you thought of using a more robust representation of what to match > than regular expressions? The cclib-Bugs-2939920 is an example of why > regular expressions are not the best way to go. > > I have written my own GAMESS parsing library using a combination of > regular expressions and the pyparsing library. > > The regular expressions are used to extract blocks of text from a GAMESS > output file. Then pyparsing is used to extract the data I need from > those blocks. > > Pyparsing is slow compared to regular expressions, but far easier to use > and specify what you want to match. By extracting and processing > meaningful blocks of text, like the HESS-END block in a GAMESS dat file, > you can then use pyparsing to easily extract the data you want. > > Mark > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation > Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business > Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts > Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com > _______________________________________________ > cclib-devel mailing list > ccl...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cclib-devel > |