Re: [Opencxx-users] test build failure: Ubuntu Dapper Amd64/libtool

[skaller <sk...@us...>]

On Mon, 2006-07-24 at 14:14 -0400, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> skaller wrote:

> Right. Elsa uses some interesting alternative approach (retaining all possible
> parse subtrees until at a later stage of semantic analysis the wrong ones can
> be eliminated).

Actually it prunes them as it goes, it applies a whole lot
of nasty heuristics to try to prune branches ASAP. 

> However, Synopsis, given its history, shares with OpenC++ one particular feature:
> the input data are fully preserved, thus making it particularly easy to write
> a 'minimally intrusive' and non-lossy source-to-source translator, since, after
> local modifications are applied to the parse tree / buffer, the latter is
> reserialized to a file.

In other words it generates an actual parse tree, rather than
an abstract syntax tree?

-- 
John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net>
Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net