Re: lexer-parser approach in Racket [was the list of languages made with racket [Hacker News]]
Aidan Gauland <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.racket.user,gmane.lisp.scheme.plt |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 2/03/19 3:27 AM, Matthias Felleisen wrote: >> On Mar 1, 2019, at 2:15 AM, Aidan Gauland <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 24/02/19 12:08 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote: >>> 2. The means of implementation in Racket are radically different from a lexer-parser approach. >> Wait, does this mean that the Beautiful Racket book is leading me down the wrong path? I'm in the middle of the bf chapter <https://beautifulracket.com/bf/>, which (if I am understanding it correctly, is using a lexer and a parser. > Please read this comment in context. This line is a response to a particular point raised in the Reddit link of the original post. On this Reddit thread, someone seems to confuse creating DSLs with writing new syntax for more-or-less standard semantic concepts. For such people, it matters to find a conventional Lex-Yacc (replace with modern words) tool chain plus perhaps some support for backend creation. > > [snip] I apologise for missing the context; I did take a look at the thread, but I still misunderstood your remark initially. Thanks for the clarification. Regards, Aidan Gauland -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/[email protected] For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.