sjrdoeraene at gmail.com
Wed Oct 31 09:31:25 CET 2012
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:27 PM, Torsten Anders
<torsten.anders at beds.ac.uk>wrote:
> Unfortunately, ozh (the javadoc complement) is then also gone, because it
> depends on Gump. But once we have a full grammar of the Oz language itself
> then it would in principle be possible to port ozh.
Wow, that's something I didn't know about ^^ But indeed, the grammar can be
BTW: as the Oz parser itself is defined in Oz, does this mean we already
> have a full grammar of the Oz language itself? Would it also be possible to
> define extensions of the Oz syntax by extending this grammar?
Yes, we already have a full grammar of the Oz language itself:
It's not document yet, and it is an only grammar for lexer, preprocessor
and parser, so it's a bit tricky to fully grab.
And yes, eventually it will be possible to define extensions to the parser.
The Packrat engine (written by Yves Jaradin) supports the redefinition of
itself inside the grammar itself ^^ That's how the preprocessor part of the
Oz parser works. It's very powerful, but again, difficult to fully grab.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the mozart-users