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?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk