User Ratings
Rate This Project
Login To Rate This Project
User Reviews
-
Excellent piece software! Cleverly written and easy to use once you understand the design, highly recommended!
-
very difficult. but it's cool. thanks quex
-
very good project
-
Thanks for great project! Simply the best!
-
Great project, great support!
-
very interesting project, very pleased with the support of many encodings, often have problems with it
-
I'm starting to write lexers from level zero. Quex is very easy for beginners to learn. Moreover, it has many powerful features for advanced use, such as good C++ supporting, Unicode alphabets and modes. The error recovering is also nice. :-)
-
thanks man, great soft!
-
Support is is very good.
-
I've used Gnu's Flex lexer (not to be confused with Adobe's flex) in the past and ran into its limitations. Quex on the other hand is industrial strength. It is better, more powerful and has much greater capacity. In my use case, Quex generated a 150K lines of a C++ file without any complaints. The Flex that I used (a few years ago, so maybe it's been improved since then) wouldn't have been able to stand up to that. Another key feature is Quex's "modes" which IMHO are superior to Flex's "states". If you are lexing something of a heterogeneous nature, Quex's powerful modes will save you. After struggling to make a regular expression to solve my problem, I found that using modes greatly simplified the problem. In addition, splitting your matches across modes make it much easier to debug and maintain your code. I found the undo() function very handy, as it allows you to undo a match to backtrack. I also like the optional on_failure event handler, which helps you debug your lexer by catching missing matches. Frank has also been great at addressing any issues I've run into. Learning Quex is a bit of an investment, but I think it's well worth it if you are going to do any serious lexing. Bottom line, Quex ought to be in your software toolbox.
-
The error handling is extremely helpful. QueX often specifically points out what the error in the source file might be. The author is very helpful and very quick with suggestions.
-
Big props for quex. The scanner runs like a charm and is really fast. I achieve throughput rates of about 4.5MB/s with a relatively complex definition. Additionally, the amount of generated code is heavily reduced in comparison to re2c (50MB vs. 200MB). Furthermore, quex-generated code can be complied a lot faster, again in comparison to re2c.
-
Quex works very well for me, and when I've found some awkward corners where it needed improving, Frank-Rene Shaefer was very helpful and prompt with fixes.
-
Choosing Quex for my project was a no-brainer as Quex handles Unicode out of the box. It also generates really fast lexers and the author is very helpful.
-
1) c++ 2) unicode 3) support
-
Works really fast, pretty easy in use and Frank is incredibly helpful!
-
It is much C++ support than flex. Keep the good working, I love it! Thanks.
-
We were looking for replacement for Boost.Spirit parser for our application and picked Quex over the flex because of ease of use and built-in Unicode support. I am still learning Quex but from what I've seen so far I like it very much and there are no regrets for picking it. In some places the documentation maybe a little bit incomplete and behind the code but Frank provides an excellent support to fill the gaps!
-
I needed a lexer generator capable of handling Unicode for use in text analytics. Quex works well and Frank-Rene was very helpful in solving the problems that I found.
-
I have been using quex for quite a while now. It works well and support is is very good and quick.
-
As the maintainer of this project, I naturally recommend this project to others!
- Previous
- You're on page 1
- Next