From: Grzegorz J. <ja...@ac...> - 2004-08-10 09:02:58
|
Stefan Seefeld wrote: > Hi Gilles, > > Gilles J. Seguin wrote: > >> On Fri, 2004-07-30 at 22:09, Stefan Seefeld wrote: >> >>> Thanks. In fact, I'm working on the C++ parser right now, >>> to be able to expose a much more rich AST to python to allow >>> real code inspection and following that code generation. >>> Drop in if you have ideas or even want to help :-) >> >> >> >> Hello Stefan, >> >> First a little introduction. >> I have offered Grzegorz Jakacki, from the opencxx project >> to update the configuration of opencxx. That step is done. >> The change are visible on the branch rel_2_8. >> Grzegorz is targetting third week of august for releasing 2.8 . > > > yeah, I know :-) > >> Next project in opencxx, increase test coverage. >> Any idea are welcome. > > > I'm doing that inside synopsis right now, i.e. I'm adding tests > to the opencxx backend inside synopsis. My tests are all organized > using the qmtest framework (www.qmtest.com), and I offered Grzegorz > to put something similar into place for his project. Just to clarify: I have never rejected it and this is still open. I tried to understand how Synopsis uses qmtest, but for misc. reasons I failed. Stefan, if you have running examples that do qmtesting of OpenC++, I would love to have a look. And generally, could you post instructions how to check out your OpenC++ "branch" from Synopsis repo? And last but not least: I think that the first thing that should be established if we get down to increasing coverage is a mechanism to measure line coverage conveniently (using e.g. gcov). Otherwise speaking about increasing coverage is a little bit hand waving. If any of you guys want to take it, please do, I will be busy with other things at least till the end of August (samples, 2.8, merging to main, docs). > That being said, I still hope (as you may know) that we can at some > point merge both projects. Right now I'm doing most work on synopsis, > offering from time to time to merge back fixes into the OpenC++ project. This is certainly suboptimal. However, I don't see any straightforward solution at the moment. I would suggest that we go through options again, so that we can have more convenient setup, say, in mid-September. BR Grzegorz >> The main point of this email, how can I see the work that >> you are doing on the C++ parser. >> I have done 'svn checkout', so I have revision 1332. > > > I'm just starting my work on the backend. My plans are (in that order): > > * rewrite some low level classes (Buffer, Lexer, basically) > > * make the existing API more clean (const-correct, more typed, etc.) > > * try to understand how the Parser needs to be changed in order to > correctly understand the tokens, i.e. build a correct parse tree / AST > (see recent posts on the opencxx list). > > * build a true high-level AST API on top (no more Car() / Cdr() calls !) > > * export that AST API publicly through C++ as well as python > > * get rid of the occ executable, provide a python script instead (for > backward compatibility only) > > * solidify the C++ / python APIs to let users build their domain-specific > applications either as python scripts or C++ programs > > I realize this is a lot of work. I'm not sure what the timeframe is to get > all of this done. I'v almost finished the first point (the Buffer is > committed, > the Lexer will follow one of these days). > If you are interested in getting involved, let me know. > > Kind regards, > Stefan > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by OSTG. Have you noticed the changes on > Linux.com, ITManagersJournal and NewsForge in the past few weeks? Now, > one more big change to announce. We are now OSTG- Open Source Technology > Group. Come see the changes on the new OSTG site. www.ostg.com > _______________________________________________ > Opencxx-users mailing list > Ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opencxx-users |