On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 13:49:17 +0000 (UTC), Dave Sieber <dsieber@spamnot.sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> I will have to take a look at COCO, based on your praise for it here! I'd
> been looking around at various parser generators over the years, and ANTLR looks like a potential good choice, although I haven't worked with it yet.

Hi, I have used ANTLR a couple of years back and it was the best parser generator I worked with. If I would have to choose a tool, that's my choice.

-- 
Robert M. Münch
Management & IT Freelancer
http://www.robertmuench.de

Robert M. Münch schrieb:
> On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 13:49:17 +0000 (UTC), Dave Sieber  <dsieber@spamnot.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> 
>> I will have to take a look at COCO, based on your praise for it here! I'd
>> been looking around at various parser generators over the years, and  ANTLR looks like a potential good choice, although I haven't worked with  it yet.
> 
> 
> Hi, I have used ANTLR a couple of years back and it was the best parser  generator I worked with. If I would have to choose a tool, that's my  choice.

I would think that ANTLR is a spiritual follower of COCO/R, which should be about 20 years old by now. I see that ANTLR is an exremely powerful and flexible system... I must look closer at it.

However, parser generators are both LL, and converting grammars between them must only be a matter of syntax.

-eye

P.S. What this leads to me... one could do a sort of D system which could compile console Java programs, such as ANTLR. Not sure how it's worth it though.