Re: [Opencxx-users] Re: The Array type

Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> Hi Gilles,
> 
> Gilles J. Seguin wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, 2004-07-30 at 22:09, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks. In fact, I'm working on the C++ parser right now,
>>> to be able to expose a much more rich AST to python to allow
>>> real code inspection and following that code generation.
>>> Drop in if you have ideas or even want to help :-)
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello Stefan,
>>
>> First a little introduction.
>> I have offered Grzegorz Jakacki, from the opencxx project
>> to update the configuration of opencxx.  That step is done.
>> The change are visible on the branch rel_2_8.
>> Grzegorz is targetting third week of august for releasing 2.8 .
> 
> 
> yeah, I know :-)
> 
>> Next project in opencxx, increase test coverage.
>> Any idea are welcome.
> 
> 
> I'm doing that inside synopsis right now, i.e. I'm adding tests
> to the opencxx backend inside synopsis. My tests are all organized
> using the qmtest framework (www.qmtest.com), and I offered Grzegorz
> to put something similar into place for his project.

Just to clarify: I have never rejected it and this is still open. I 
tried to understand how Synopsis uses qmtest, but for misc. reasons I 
failed. Stefan, if you have running examples that do qmtesting of 
OpenC++, I would love to have a look. And generally, could you post 
instructions how to check out your OpenC++ "branch" from Synopsis repo?

And last but not least: I think that the first thing that should be 
established if we get down to increasing coverage is a mechanism to 
measure line coverage conveniently (using e.g. gcov). Otherwise speaking 
about increasing coverage is a little bit hand waving. If any of you 
guys want to take it, please do, I will be busy with other things at 
least till the end of August (samples, 2.8, merging to main, docs).

> That being said, I still hope (as you may know) that we can at some
> point merge both projects.  Right now I'm doing most work on synopsis,
> offering from time to time to merge back fixes into the OpenC++ project.

This is certainly suboptimal. However, I don't see any straightforward 
solution at the moment. I would suggest that we go through options 
again, so that we can have more convenient setup, say, in mid-September.

BR
Grzegorz

>> The main point of this email, how can I see the work that
>> you are doing on the C++ parser.
>> I have done 'svn checkout', so I have revision 1332.
> 
> 
> I'm just starting my work on the backend. My plans are (in that order):
> 
> * rewrite some low level classes (Buffer, Lexer, basically)
> 
> * make the existing API more clean (const-correct, more typed, etc.)
> 
> * try to understand how the Parser needs to be changed in order to
>   correctly understand the tokens, i.e. build a correct parse tree / AST
>   (see recent posts on the opencxx list).
> 
> * build a true high-level AST API on top (no more Car() / Cdr() calls !)
> 
> * export that AST API publicly through C++ as well as python
> 
> * get rid of the occ executable, provide a python script instead (for
>   backward compatibility only)
> 
> * solidify the C++ / python APIs to let users build their domain-specific
>   applications either as python scripts or C++ programs
> 
> I realize this is a lot of work. I'm not sure what the timeframe is to get
> all of this done. I'v almost finished the first point (the Buffer is 
> committed,
> the Lexer will follow one of these days).
> If you are interested in getting involved, let me know.
> 
> Kind regards,
>         Stefan
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by OSTG. Have you noticed the changes on
> Linux.com, ITManagersJournal and NewsForge in the past few weeks? Now,
> one more big change to announce. We are now OSTG- Open Source Technology
> Group. Come see the changes on the new OSTG site. www.ostg.com
> _______________________________________________
> Opencxx-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opencxx-users