Re: [Opencxx-users] Re: refining the Synopsis APIs

Vladimir Prus wrote:

>>I do believe that the names should express that one is focussing on syntax,
>>the other on semantics (though the meaning of these two terms is definitely
>>more clear if used in conjunction, i.e. opposition, and not independently).
> 
> 
> Excellent! What about naming the modules "Syntax" and "Semantic"?

The advantage of 'AST' over 'Syntax' is that it is well recognized in the
community / literature.
That's not quite true for 'ASG' (even though there are quite a number of places
using the term, in particular in conjunction with 'AST'). I find 'Semantic'
not very satisfactory, not least because it is not a noun. Semantic what ?

Isn't our struggle also related to the fact (as you once stated yourself)
that there are quite a lot of different types of semantic information to be
extracted from the sources ? May be we get further looking for more precise
terms for what we try to express there. There are other kinds of data to
be extracted that would equally well fit under the 'semantic' umbrella,
such as call graphs, control flow graphs, etc. (and may be someone will want
to build these representations on top of our current work).

How would you describe the representation currently used in the Synopsis.AST
and Synopsis.Type modules (i.e. the data structure used to generate documentation) ?

Regards,
		Stefan