Johan wrote:
So, yes, stick to the language spec. Some PhD student will be glad for it at some later time!
Ok, so that problem we don't have in Delphi. There is no spec, and all available grammars are wrong. AFAIK, most languages have either that problem, or no significant implementations that follow the spec (c++, sql).
Chris doesn't seem opposed to a very detailed level, as long as there are some convenience accessors in the right places. Our problem with PetitDelphi is that there is no way to know what nodes to create, without having a usecase for them. So we just started (like Chris, I guess) with what we seemed to need.
Stephan
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Stephan Eggermont stephan@stack.nl wrote:
Johan wrote:
So, yes, stick to the language spec. Some PhD student will be glad for it
at some later time!
without having a usecase for them. So we just started (like Chris, I guess) with what we seemed to need.
Yes, that is exactly what I did. And then I responded to a certain degree
to criticisms (most all of which were deserved) with some changes.
Stephan _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-
Chris Cunningham -
Stephan Eggermont