Re: Synopsis roadmap

Stefan Seefeld <[email protected]> writes:

> David Abrahams wrote:
>> Stefan Seefeld <[email protected]> writes:
>> 
>>>Douglas Gregor wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>The best reference for this is our Implementing Concepts paper,
>>>>available at:
>>>>  http://www.osl.iu.edu/~dgregor/ConceptGCC/papers/index.html
>>>>There's also an updated and much-improved version of the concepts
>>>>proposal there.
>>>
>>>Found it, thanks a lot !
>> So, how about it?  It is getting a bit urgent for us to have this
>> functionality.  If I can help in any way, I'd be willing.
>
> Could you (or Doug) please summarize what you expect synopsis to do
> when it encounters such code ?

I think Synopsis needs to build AST for it, just like any other code.

> Adding productions to accept the syntax is (almost) straight forward,
> but doing even the least bit of semantic analysis is not.

I don't think any semantic analysis is needed.  But maybe you're
calling some things semantic analysis that I am not?

> As you may know, the old parser has some trouble with slightly 'advanced'
> C++ code, which made me start to rewrite it entirely. 

Yep.

> (Looking back now,
> I wonder how it managed to produce any useable results on things like
> boost's libraries at all.)

:)

> While I feel I make good progress with the new parser, it definitely
> isn't ready for prime time yet.

What's missing?

> And, neither the old nor the new parser have real overload resolution or
> (partial) template specialization.

What does it mean to not "have" real partial template specialization
in a parser?  Or overload resolution, for that matter?  (Partial)
specialization support in a parser is just a matter of being able to
eat the syntax.  Overload resolution is a semantic analysis issue.
No?

> So, again, the answer to your question above depends on what kind of
> support you expect. May be we could break down the task into distinct
> chunks (parsing, analysis, etc.), to be able to estimate the efford
> and prioritize a bit.

Absolutely.  Let's break it down.  But I'm not sure how you're drawing
those distinctions, so I need to hear more from you I think.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com