Fwd: Re: Source Navigator (was: Content of the Perl6 talk)

Mo DeJong mdejong@cygnus.com
Sun Jul 30 16:26:00 GMT 2000

On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, Ben Elliston wrote:

>    > The coming month is sort of crazy, unfortunately.  In September, I'll be 
>    > revisiting this stuff - to make it more general.  If there's an easy way 
>    > to make this code useful for SN, I'd be happy to do so.
>    Could you post a note about this on sourcenav@sources.redhat.com? That
>    way, other folks will know about your code and plans, there is already
>    one other guys talking about fixing the Tcl parser.
> Would it make sense to try and make use of the parser in Tcl?  Are there
> public Tcl library functions to get access to the parser--perhaps
> registering semantic actions?  This way, Tcl support would never lag behind
> Tcl itself.

That is what I was thinking. The thing about Jean-Claude's approach
is that it is the Tcl parser, it is just an embedded verison. The
Tcl is frozen. There really have not been any parser changes for a
long time, so that is not much of a concern. It is really hard to
get ANY parser change into Tcl, I am currently trying to get the
Tcl folk to agree that "set i []" should set the variable i to
the liternal string "[]" instead of the empty string.
The hard part is not the parser, it is the "rules"
you would need to add after the parsing to really make
things useful.

For instance:
eval foo $args

This should be recorded as a call to the proc foo, not a call
to eval. You need to ignore that fact that users could create
a new method call eval and just do what 99% of the folks
would expect. Of course, you could also argue that this should
be a call to eval and a call to foo.

Mo DeJong
Red Hat Inc

More information about the Sourcenav mailing list