Re: Interest in new parsing library?

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2023-12-30 19:32:57

On 12/28/23 1:05 PM, Zach Laine via Boost wrote:
> I'm trying to gauge interest in a parsing library to replace
> Boost.Spirit 2/Spirit X3.  I'm also looking for endorsements.
> 
> The library is intended to remedy some shortcomings of Boost.Spirit*.
> I think these are great libraries, but Spirit 2 was written in pre-11
> C++ (I think; certainly its dependencies were).  Most-to-all of the
> downsides stem from that -- long compile times, inscrutable
> compilation failures, etc.  (Boost.Parser compile times are quite
> low.)
> 
> I'm calling my proposal Boost.Parser, and it follows many of the
> conventions of Boost.Spirit  2 and X3, such as the operators used for
> overloading, the names of many parsers and directives, etc.  It
> requires C++17 or later.
> 

Very interesting.

The Boost Serialization library has used Boost Spirit x1 to parse xml 
archives for over 20 years. I had some familiarity with recursive 
descent parsing and relatively little with template metaprogramming 
which made for a strenuous learning experience. The library comes with 
incredible documentation. Once I got the hang of it, I was/am happy with 
it.  I haven't touched it in 20 years.  I totally and completely forgot 
everything about it.  This is a testament to the capability of it's 
author.  The concept of separating the grammar specification from token 
handlers made the actual code almost nothing.  I've looked at the 
comments here and a little at the document.  One question:

Is there a reason it shouldn't be named Spirit4 ?

Robert Ramey