Thread: RE: [cedet-semantic] New C++-parser available - was: Lates seman tic f rom CVS?
Brought to you by:
zappo
From: Berndl, K. <kla...@sd...> - 2003-01-29 17:26:01
|
>Hmm, are references important too? Just asking, because references are >not recognised but simply ignored, I think. AFAIK references are recognized and the information is even stored in the semantic-tokens but no output-function of semantic displays refs - the output- functions of semantic (and therefore also ECB) ignore currently refs. Is this right, Eric? If not, then i have to go back to c.bnf ;-) Ciao, klaus |
From: Eric M. L. <er...@si...> - 2003-01-29 19:36:23
|
>>> "Berndl, Klaus" <kla...@sd...> seems to think that: >>Hmm, are references important too? Just asking, because references are >>not recognised but simply ignored, I think. > >AFAIK references are recognized and the information is even stored in the >semantic-tokens but no output-function of semantic displays refs - the output- >functions of semantic (and therefore also ECB) ignore currently refs. > >Is this right, Eric? [ ... ] That is right. C overrides very few of the token->text functions because the default ones make C like output. Things that were too esoteric I just left out. I opted for C like output in the defaults because when you compile non-C languages into .o files, if you use nm, gdb, and whatnot, the printed representation is usually C also. I think I may challenge this idea, and perhaps suggest that C/C++ define more of these functions in the figure, and perhaps the defaults should have many complicated C syntax parts removed. (In the trunk, not v1p4, of course) Eric -- Eric Ludlam: za...@gn..., er...@si... Home: http://www.ludlam.net Siege: www.siege-engine.com Emacs: http://cedet.sourceforge.net GNU: www.gnu.org |