On Jun 13, 4:47 pm, Marshall <marshall.spi..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> 3) is interesting. I admit that when I first heard about the
> idea I was extremely skeptical. The idea that one would
> write a grammar to abstract operating on a tree one had
> generated by using a grammar to abstract over a language
> seemed perverse and unnecessarily complex at first.
> However in practice it's turned out to be the opposite:
> it is extremely simple. Tree grammars are a fraction
> of the size of the original grammar, possible similarly
> to the size of an XPath expression to a DTD.
Do you have a reference?
http://antlr.org/article/1170602723163/treewalkers.html
insists that the "tree grammar" concept is not appeared to be coherent
to begin with...
Received on Wed Jun 13 2007 - 19:35:55 CDT
