[Linuxsampler-devel] parser generator (was: Latest CVS Commit)

[Christian S. <sch...@so...>]

Hi everybody!

I don't think I like all these tradeoffs in the protocol definition you're 
discussing the last days. :) The reason why I left this naive approach of the 
scanner/parser definition with all its ambiguities was the hope that we could 
find and move to a good parser generator that doesn't have this annoying or 
better say radical split between scanner and parser. That's the main problem 
of these ambiguities, not the protocol definition itself.

So I would suggest to research for a better parser generator instead of doing 
all these unpretty and inconvinient tradeoffs and hacks.

CU
Christian

P.S. case insensitivity does make sense; there's also a LSCP *shell* planned, 
which can handle autocompletion, etc., but not in the near future of course

Es geschah am Montag, 21. Juni 2004 14:17 als Simon Jenkins schrieb:
> Rui Nuno Capela wrote:
> >[...] What about that all-upper-case restriction for command keywords? And
> > the parameter key names _must_ be capitalized or sort of.
>
> My suggestion was that "key names _must_ not match keywords" be the only
> rule -
> its sufficient - and that key names be mixed case by convention, rather
> than by law.
> That would allow for the occasional upper-case name where it made sense,
> eg for
> acronyms (still use ALSA rather than Alsa).
>
> The keywords are all upper case because... thats just the way they are.
> Its not a rule
> exactly (or IMHO shouldn't be) its simply the convention that was
> chosen/adopted.
>
> (FWIW I don't particularly like the upper case keywords because
> 1) its less readable,
> 2) its less typeable,
> 3) there's no need to shout, and
> 4) it isn't 1976 any more.
> But its not my place to rework the protocol according to my personal
> tastes/prejudices,
> especially when I lurked my way through the first eight drafts and am
> not involved in
> the software at either end of the link. So I'm just offering what help I
> can to make the
> parser work at all).
>
> >Isn't it too restrictive? I'd rather have LSCP case insensitive al
> > together.
>
> There's not much advantage in making the protocol case insensitive. Its
> not like
> the software at either end is going to forget to press the shift key.
> More likely it
> would fail to match an oddly cased key name because someone forgot
> ToUpper().
> OK, some people might need to type LSCP by hand, but with a consistent
> set of
> conventions it shouldn't be too hard for them to get it right.
>
> The disadvantages of case insensitivity are
> 1) extra work in the lexical analyser and
> 2) extra opportunity for name/keyword clashes: It would no longer be
> possible to
> use the key name "Channel" because it would now clash with the keyword
> "CHANNEL".
>
> >Again, putting my logs into the fire ;)
>
> Me too. And its not even my fire.
>
> Simon Jenkins
> (Bristol, UK).
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by The 2004 JavaOne(SM) Conference
> Learn from the experts at JavaOne(SM), Sun's Worldwide Java Developer
> Conference, June 28 - July 1 at the Moscone Center in San Francisco, CA
> REGISTER AND SAVE! http://java.sun.com/javaone/sf Priority Code NWMGYKND
> _______________________________________________
> Linuxsampler-devel mailing list
> Lin...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxsampler-devel