Re: RM and abstract syntax trees
From: paul c <toledobythesea_at_ooyah.ac>
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 16:04:46 GMT
Message-ID: <yOmWi.167377$th2.137656_at_pd7urf3no>
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 16:04:46 GMT
Message-ID: <yOmWi.167377$th2.137656_at_pd7urf3no>
David BL wrote:
> In the following I compare different techniques for representing an
> Abstract Syntax Tree (AST), concluding that RM is poorly suited.
> ...
I could just as well say that your choice of application is poorly suited.
From Wikepedia:
"In computing, it is used in a parser as an intermediate between a parse
tree and a data structure"
To me, trying this is reminiscent of EAV attempts, ie., using the RM to
give an "intermediate" implementation. Apart from "jobs for the boys",
why would one want to? Surely the application here is the manipulation
of the parse tree, not the AST.
Received on Thu Nov 01 2007 - 17:04:46 CET