[Fwd: Re: Fortran Parser -- last call]

[Philippe Marguinaud <philippe dot marguinaud at meteo dot fr>]

--- Begin Message ---

• From: Philippe Marguinaud <philippe dot marguinaud at meteo dot fr>
• To: Daniel Franke <franke dot daniel at gmail dot com>
• Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2008 09:11:53 +0100
• Subject: Re: Fortran Parser -- last call
• References: <4936B824.9020704@meteo.fr> <200812032034.20439.franke.daniel@gmail.com>

Hi Daniel,

There is no point in submitting patches if people do not agree with the idea. Let me state again that what I suggest to do is not what is provided by the parse-tree-dump option.
I do not want to improve the existing parser, I do not want to bring some revolution in the field of parsing code, I do not want you to use XML. I want to rely on the gfortran parser to describe what Fortran code is and what it means; that is what I have done with g95. The output will be in XML, for the following reason: XML is able to express both data and document centric concepts.
Again, see my page at http://g95-xml.sourceforge.net/.


Regards,

Philippe


Daniel Franke a écrit :

On Wednesday 03 December 2008 17:47:32 Philippe Marguinaud wrote:

I would like to have an answer about whether it is OK or not to work on
the gfortran parser. If the answer is yes, please tell how I should
proceed.

Philippe,

I've followed your messages up until now and am still not 100% sure what you propose.

Nobody will "disallow" you to work on gfortran's parser. I'm sure, everybody would appreciate it if it would get some additional love. Thus, if you wish to bring in your experience in parser-writing and improve the existing parser, get the paperwork with the FSF started and dig in. Your patch(es) will be reviewed as any others and happily be accepted (or maybe not). Bugzilla currently has 99 diagnostic-related PRs [1], those would probably be a good starting point.

Also, as Paul suggested in earlier mail [2], improving the parse-tree-dump, for example an XML-output option, would be highly welcome as well. However, replacing the internal tree of gfortran by an XML-based representation is, most likely, not going to happen.

Does this help?

Daniel

[1] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&product=gcc&component=fortran&known_to_fail_type=allwordssubstr&known_to_work_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc_type=substring&long_desc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&gcchost_type=allwordssubstr&gcchost=&gcctarget_type=allwordssubstr&gcctarget=&gccbuild_type=allwordssubstr&gccbuild=&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=diagnostic&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=SUSPENDED&bug_status=WAITING&bug_status=REOPENED&emailassigned_to1=1&emailtype1=substring&email1=&emailassigned_to2=1&emailreporter2=1&emailcc2=1&emailtype2=substring&email2=&bugidtype=include&bug_id=&votes=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time&field0-0-0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0=
[2] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2008-11/msg00375.html

--- End Message ---