Re: [boost] Any interest for a parser class?

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-17 05:15:53

joel de guzman wrote:

> > Do you refer to "expr[ref(var)]". I don't think this is enough. Command
> > line parsing library must provide storage for values, validate them,
> > handle multiple assignments and so on.
>
> Much more than that now. But I am not sure what you mean by "validate them,
> handle multiple assignments and so on". 

Quite simple. Users should be able to extend parser framework for their 
types, and not be required to use Spirit for validating those types.

> > Do you really think that Spirit will be great improvement to a command
> > line handling library? At this moment the hand-written code which deal
> > with parsing proper is only 44 lines.
>
> I am not sure. I am not an expert on command line interfaces. I
> haven't programmed one yet. The only thing I am sure is that it can
> be done and it can do much more.

The only question is if Spirit will make any much difference for users that 
will justify making it a requirement. Yes, David Greene expressed a wish for 
an elaborated command line syntax, but it remains to be decided if it can'be 
be supported without using full-blown parser.

> Also, forgive me but why isn't nondeterministic RD not
> acceptable for parsing command lines?

Becase command line syntax can be ambiguious. Checking for those ambiguities 
and *documented* resolution of those resolvable are a must. Can 
nonterministic parsing give me that?

- Volodya