Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED.news.iecc.com!nerds-end
From: Ev Drikos <drikosev@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Subject: Re: Interesting paper on regex NFA matching
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2024 11:14:00 +0200
Organization: Compilers Central
Sender: johnl%iecc.com
Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com
Message-ID: <24-02-001@comp.compilers>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Injection-Info: gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="11017"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com"
Keywords: lex
Posted-Date: 04 Feb 2024 10:23:06 EST
X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com
X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com
X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com
Xref: csiph.com comp.compilers:3553

On 27/01/2024 12:47, Christopher F Clark wrote:

>
> You are mistaken that they are not applicable to programming languages.
>

Hello,

I agree; another example is the keyword FORMAT in Fortran. No matter how
the scanner is implemented, generated or hand coded, the  FORMAT
statement requires forward scanning if the parser is deterministic,
in which case error messages can be IMHO descriptive, as shown ie here:
https://gist.github.com/drikosev/56202b8d928c22da33aebc7cc0e16193

Related examples with the lookahead operator '+:' can be found here:
https://github.com/drikosev/Fortran/blob/master/OMP_Fortran_Scanner.txt

Hope, I'm not out of topic.

Ev. Drikos