[01:05:28] *** Quits: proteusguy (~proteusgu@cm-58-10-154-54.revip7.asianet.co.th) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) [07:24:31] *** Joins: proteusguy (~proteusgu@mx-ll-14.207.171-27.dynamic.3bb.co.th) [12:54:51] *** Quits: stoopkid (uid137696@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-dnwljzdvjrwcbiiw) (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity) [15:08:02] *** Joins: Lycurgus (~niemand@cpe-45-46-138-162.buffalo.res.rr.com) [15:09:33] may I ask a question related to grammars/parsing but not GF specifically? [15:10:43] sure! [15:10:52] always glad when someone talks here ^_^ [15:11:54] there's a compiler compiler toolkit I used professionally to good effect some decades ago [15:13:17] it had about 4 features that were overwhelmingly good, but the main one being a char mode debugger which it called a visible parser that sped reduce/shift conflict debugging [15:14:07] if I port it to clang and friends that would be good and it wouldn't take that long since I'm quite familiar with the code [15:14:56] but I'm wondering if there isn't something that would allow me to develop just a complete bnf grammar and has a nice debugger like that [15:15:14] without committing to anything more than the bnf [15:15:19] ? [15:16:23] have you tried http://bnfc.digitalgrammars.com/ ? I don't know if it has such a debugger, it does have some kind of debugger, but I haven't used it in 3 years [15:16:47] well i know of bnfc i think [15:16:58] yeah not a surprise for someone who lurks on #gf :-P [15:17:27] but yeah I haven't used any other such tool, and don't know the details of them [15:17:47] it's possible something i already know of or has been updated would work, when looking last night antlr came up but its [15:17:51] an empire [15:18:01] i just want a tool [15:18:11] but an imperial tool igess [15:18:54] i'll (re) look at bnfc in a bit. Thank You! [15:23:17] ok now I remember, it's an option to happy where you can get the debug info http://www.cse.chalmers.se/edu/year/2015/course/DAT151/laborations/lab1/lab1.html [15:23:32] " You can use any code generator (Haskell, Java, C,...) from BNFC. It doesn't need to be the same language as you plan to use in later labs. However, if you use Haskell, you have the advantage of info files, which tell you exactly where the conflicts are. Assuming your grammar file is CPP.cf and you have called bnfc on it, you can create an info file from the generated Happy file: [15:23:32] happy -i ParCPP.y [15:23:32] The info file is now in ParCPP.info. Moreover, you can produce a debugging parser by [15:23:32] happy -da ParCPP.y [15:23:33] Running this parser shows a trace of the LR actions performed during parsing. " [15:24:42] yes marrying bnfc to the ported compiler compiler mentioned would be ideal course [15:31:45] *** Quits: proteusguy (~proteusgu@mx-ll-14.207.171-27.dynamic.3bb.co.th) (Remote host closed the connection) [15:35:59] yeah, and those two seem to work pretty well without much hassle, you can cabal install both bnfc and happy, and then just write your .cf file [15:36:30] (I'm just assuming that everyone on #gf is a haskell programmer :-D) [15:36:54] maybe gf-log-bot isn't :-P [15:38:54] right, well I do hs but I don't describe myself as a programmer [15:39:23] ubuntu has 2.8.1 as the one it wants to install but I'll let stack do the thing [15:40:17] actually my GF interest is more prolog driven [15:52:28] *** Quits: Lycurgus (~niemand@cpe-45-46-138-162.buffalo.res.rr.com) (Quit: Exeunt) [16:02:24] *** Joins: stoopkid (uid137696@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-rdxzoaomwcfxqzug) [16:12:13] *** Joins: proteusguy (~proteusgu@cm-58-10-155-25.revip7.asianet.co.th) [16:53:38] *** Joins: Patternmaster (~georg@li1192-118.members.linode.com) [21:01:34] *** Quits: stoopkid (uid137696@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-rdxzoaomwcfxqzug) (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity)