Re: OT(slightly): parser generator for expression with custom operators

[Lorenzo Donati <lorenzodonatibz@...>]

On 29/06/2011 18.54, Wesley Smith wrote:
> Sounds like there are a range of options for what you need.  If you
> can make do with the Lua metamethods and a little string substitution,
> I would definitely stick with a pure Lua implementation.  However, if
> you need to define a syntax that can't be handled by existing Lua
> mechanisms, you can write a simple grammar and interpret the AST
> yourself.

Well, I'd love to have those skills, but as I said before: I'm 
CS-impaired :-)

That was the whole point of starting this thread in the first place!

I know enough about grammars and EBNF to be able to read and (mostly) 
understand a grammar (I even managed to use XML specification as a tool 
to learn and write XML some years ago ;-)

But I'm far from being able to design a grammar based on which operator 
should have which precedence, which associativity, etc. etc.!

> I have had to do this for a couple of projects, which is
> why I wrote the codepeg[1] module.  It can automatically generate a
> parser from a grammar specification.

Interesting, nevertheless. Thanks.

> wes
>
> [1] https://github.com/weshoke/codepeg

-- Lorenzo