Re: Help using bison

[Russell Shaw]

Bob Rossi wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 05:22:29PM +1100, Russell Shaw wrote:
>
> > Bob Rossi wrote:
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > I'm writing a GPL'd ncurses front end to GDB, called CGDB.
> >
> > Did you know gdb already has a curses frontend?
> >
> > gdb -tui
>
> In particular, according to this webpage, it seems like I'm looking for
> something called bison++.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.compilers/browse_thread/thread/26993e5d0b2e8120/48f1cc2e4c349b84?lnk=st&q=asynchronous+bison+parser&rnum=1&hl=en#48f1cc2e4c349b84
>
> Does bison currently support "inverted flow-of-control"? Do you
> recommend another package for this? Could I come up with some patches
> to modify bison to act this way?

Hi,
I don't know enough about bison internals, other than it calls the lexer
and not the other way around.

I still don't know if humans are actually supposed to be able to
see all conflicts in a grammar specification for bison, or whether
you are supposed to totally rely on the tool to find all conflicts.

When a conflict is detected, the error messages are hardly meaningful
for finding where the problem is.

Bison parsing is "ass about" and i haven't figured out how the code
being parsed will be reduced to grammar constructs in a non-ambiguous
way.

So i wrote my own LL(1) parser generator that is very small and fast.
LL parsing gives pin-point error messages and it's easy to spot grammar
ambiguities (the tool detects them anyway).

There's lots of bison info on the comp.compilers email list.