Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.compilers > #1845
| From | Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.compilers |
| Subject | Re: Parsing partial sentences |
| Date | 2017-04-07 22:24 +0200 |
| Organization | Compilers Central |
| Message-ID | <17-04-006@comp.compilers> (permalink) |
| References | <17-04-001@comp.compilers> <17-04-002@comp.compilers> <17-04-003@comp.compilers> <17-04-004@comp.compilers> |
Am 07.04.2017 um 18:59 schrieb George Neuner: > On Fri, 7 Apr 2017 11:16:18 -0400 (EDT), Hans-Peter Diettrich > <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> wrote: >> The purpose is just what I wrote: parse #defines into constructs which >> can be translated into some other programming language. It shall become >> part of my C-to-Pascal converter, written in Pascal (OPL). > > Unfortunately, #define is a textual substition ... the preprocessor > doesn't care whether the body is legal C, and the compiler itself > doesn't look at the raw #define bodies. Right, but in a language translation I want to retain as much of the original code as possible. Then a Pascal compiler can find bugs which escape the C compiler. > It might be easiest to just run the C preprocessor as a 1st pass and > then attempt to convert the result. That would obfuscate the source code widely :-( > Since a #define body is just text, it can be anything - people have > created whole DSLs using #define. If you really need to figure them > out, I'm afraid you'll need (almost) the whole C language parser to do > it. I already wrote the parser, but it's LL. For code snippets a LR parser looks like the only solution? DoDi [Since preprocessor macros are text macros, there's no reason to expect a macro's expansion can be parsed at all. Consider this: # define FOO 42 + int a, b; ... a = FOO b; A notorious example of preprocessor abuse was the Bourne shell, where Steve Bourne wrote preprocessor macros to make C look like Algol 68. -John]
Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Parsing partial sentences Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2017-04-03 09:57 +0200
Re: Parsing partial sentences Fernando <pronesto@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 06:05 -0700
Re: Parsing partial sentences Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2017-04-07 11:16 -0400
Re: Parsing partial sentences George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2017-04-07 12:59 -0400
Re: Parsing partial sentences Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2017-04-07 22:24 +0200
Re: Parsing partial sentences George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2017-04-10 20:22 -0400
Re: Parsing partial sentences Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2017-04-11 10:31 +0200
Re: Parsing partial sentences Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2017-04-11 19:40 +0200
Re: Parsing partial sentences George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2017-04-11 23:05 -0400
Re: Parsing partial sentences Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2017-04-12 13:45 +0200
Re: Parsing partial sentences Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> - 2017-04-11 10:30 +0100
Re: Parsing partial sentences Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2017-04-27 10:58 -0400
Re: Parsing partial sentences Kaz Kylheku <686-678-9105@kylheku.com> - 2017-04-27 19:08 +0000
Re: Parsing partial sentences rugxulo@gmail.com - 2017-04-28 16:32 -0700
Re: Parsing partial sentences Marco van de Voort <marcov@toad.stack.nl> - 2017-04-29 14:57 +0000
Re: Parsing partial sentences Kaz Kylheku <686-678-9105@kylheku.com> - 2017-04-30 16:31 +0000
Re: Parsing partial sentences Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2017-04-28 02:48 +0200
csiph-web