wrote:
> only funny because I remember YACC from way back. No
> doubt it still exists. I remember that was one
> heck of a frustrating program.
oh it still exists, though i've moved onto using Parse::RecDescent
as a better mouse trap for writing ad-hoc parsers:
http://search.cpan.org/~dconway/Parse-RecDescent-1.94/lib/Parse/RecDescent.pod
> and yet... some of these new tools have exactly the
> same frustration level in xml even now. I don't know
> why I think that, but it seems that way to me. Especially
> in Linux.
i guess it might be interesting to compare the shift-reduce
limitations of YACC with, say the UPA rule in W3C schema:
http://www.linuxgazette.com/issue87/ramankutty.html
--
Paul Downey
http://blog.whatfettle.com
