>Actually the grammar is going really well, except for
>one (not that tiny) simplification.

Whats the simplification ?

Charlie

In article <cg26hg$1tp5$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Ivan Senji says...
>
>"Sammy" <not@there.com> wrote in message news:cg22uf$1sg5$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> > My own :) (that is why it is so slow :)
>>
>> it is written in C. C++, ???
>
>What kind of a question is this?
>D ofcourse! :)
>
>>
>> Will you opensource it ?
>
>Maybe, if i get to parse D with it and conclude it is
>working, then i would only have to translate it to
>English and make it public.
>
>Actually the grammar is going really well, except for
>one (not that tiny) simplification.
>
>

"Charlie" <Charlie_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:cg3f41$2lir$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> >Actually the grammar is going really well, except for
> >one (not that tiny) simplification.
>
> Whats the simplification ?

As i can't tell the difference between basicType and primaryExpression
(identifier can be both..)
i made a change that basicType begins with "type"
so instead of
int x; -> type int x;
int func(char[] y); -> type int func(type char[] y);

Maybe when i finish the grammar someone will come up
with a way of combining the rules for basicType and
primaryExpression to eliminate the problem.


>
> Charlie
>
> In article <cg26hg$1tp5$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Ivan Senji says...
> >
> >"Sammy" <not@there.com> wrote in message news:cg22uf$1sg5$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> >> > My own :) (that is why it is so slow :)
> >>
> >> it is written in C. C++, ???
> >
> >What kind of a question is this?
> >D ofcourse! :)
> >
> >>
> >> Will you opensource it ?
> >
> >Maybe, if i get to parse D with it and conclude it is
> >working, then i would only have to translate it to
> >English and make it public.
> >
> >Actually the grammar is going really well, except for
> >one (not that tiny) simplification.
> >
> >
>
>