Re: Late review of Boost.Parser

From: David Sankel (camior_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-03-01 18:02:50

On Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 12:38 PM David Sankel <camior_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 12:04 PM Christian Mazakas via Boost <
> boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> > Parser combinator libraries have progressed a lot since then and, having
>> > used both styles extensively, I'm much more eager to pick up one of the
>> > more modern designs.  I would expect a Boost library to reflect the
>> state
>> > of the art not only in language features used, but also in API design
>> for
>> > the domain.
>>
>>
> The thing about Haskell is that it's had time to gain ground but it just
>> hasn't
>> because people aren't interested in it.
>
>
> This isn't relevant.
>

There's one more thing I'd like to point out. A GitHub code search for
"#include <boost/spirit" in C++ files results in 31.5k files. Another
search for "import Text.Parsec" in Haskell files results in 17.5k files.
This is telling given C++ developers outnumber Haskell developers 11 to 1.

- StackOverflow developer survey data on language poplarity (
https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey)
- GitHub code search for Boost.Spirit (
https://github.com/search?type=code&auto_enroll=true&q=%22%23include+%3Cboost%2Fspirit%22+%28path%3A*.cpp+OR+path%3A*.h+OR+path%3A*.hpp%29
)
- GitHub code search for Parsec (
https://github.com/search?type=code&auto_enroll=true&q=%22import+Text.Parsec%22+path%3A*.hs
)

>