User Ratings

★★★★★
★★★★
★★★
★★
24
0
0
0
0
ease 1 of 5 2 of 5 3 of 5 4 of 5 5 of 5 4 / 5
features 1 of 5 2 of 5 3 of 5 4 of 5 5 of 5 5 / 5
design 1 of 5 2 of 5 3 of 5 4 of 5 5 of 5 5 / 5
support 1 of 5 2 of 5 3 of 5 4 of 5 5 of 5 5 / 5

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!

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • very good project, thanks!

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • very difficult. but it's cool. thanks quex

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • Easy to install and use.

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • very good project

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • Thanks for great project! Simply the best!

    2 users found this review helpful.
  • Great project, great support!

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • very interesting project, very pleased with the support of many encodings, often have problems with it

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • 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. :-)

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • thanks man, great soft!

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • Support is is very good.

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • 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.

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • 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.

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • 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.

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • Quex is ideal for using with Lemon in Unicode environment

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • 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.

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • 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 user found this review helpful.
  • 1) c++ 2) unicode 3) support

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • Works really fast, pretty easy in use and Frank is incredibly helpful!

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • It is much C++ support than flex. Keep the good working, I love it! Thanks.

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • 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!

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • 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.

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • I have been using quex for quite a while now. It works well and support is is very good and quick.

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • As the maintainer of this project, I naturally recommend this project to others!