[Opencxx-users] design sketches

[Stefan S. <sse...@ar...>]

> From: SF Markus Elfring [mailto:el...@us...]
> Sent: October 5, 2004 01:18

> The summary about the Edward Willink's "Meta-Compilation for 
> C++" PhD thesis in the article "Parsing C++" shows more 
> design alternatives to structure this process into multiple 
> layers, phases, passes or stages.
> http://www.nobugs.org/developer/parsingcpp/


FWIW, here is a list of papers we currently look into to enhance
the parser:

* Symbol table construction and name lookup in ISO C++, 
  J. F. Power and B. A. Malloy,
  http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/power00symbol.html

* An Approach for Modeling the Name Lookup Problem in the C++ Programming
Language, 
  James F. Power and Brian A. Malloy, 
  http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/power00approach.html

* Decorating tokens to facilitate recognition of ambiguous language
constructs, 
  B. A. Malloy, J. F. Power and T. H. Gibbs, Software,
  http://www.cs.clemson.edu/~malloy/papers/papers.html

* The Design and Implementation of a Parser and Front-end for the ISO C++
Language and Validation of the Parser, 
  Tanton H.Gibbs, 
  http://www.cs.clemson.edu/~malloy/papers/papers.html

Also, there appears to be a GPLed C++ parser project available at 
http://sourceforge.net/projects/keystone/, which I'm going to look
into. One of the advantages OpenC++ has is its non-lossy storage
of the input, which makes it robust and less error-prone for code
generation (as you can modify specific places in the code and don't
need to regenerate the whole).

Right now I'm aiming at a modular structure with three or four (logical)
modules: PTree, SymbolTable, AST, and Processor. That's roughly in
alignment with the above papers, and a natural (smooth) evolution
for the OpenC++ design itself.

Comments ?

Regards,
		Stefan