Forum: Ruby Fwd: First release of Rubyfront

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
unknown (Guest)
on 2006-02-17 19:27
(Received via mailing list)
For those interested in things Ruby and grammatical, grammarian Xue
Yong Zhi presents:

----- Forwarded message from removed_email_address@domain.invalid -----
    Date: 17 Feb 2006 05:22:01 -0000
    From: removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Reply-To: removed_email_address@domain.invalid
 Subject: [grammarians] First release of Rubyfront
      To: removed_email_address@domain.invalid

I am glad to announce the first release of rubyfront (a ruby parser
powered by antlr).

Even though this is the first release, rubyfront can parse entire
ruby standard library (over 1500 .rb files).

To download or check out more details about rubyfront, please go to
http://seclib.blogspot.com/2006/02/first-release-o...


Rubyfront uses BSD license. I am going to write more about it on my
blog later.

Xue Yong Zhi
http://seclib.blogspot.com

_______________________________________________
Rubygrammar-grammarians mailing list
removed_email_address@domain.invalid
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygrammar-...

----- End forwarded message -----
unknown (Guest)
on 2006-02-18 08:28
(Received via mailing list)
In article <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>, 
<removed_email_address@domain.invalid>
wrote:
>I am glad to announce the first release of rubyfront (a ruby parser
>blog later.
>
>Xue Yong Zhi
>http://seclib.blogspot.com
>
>_______________________________________________
>Rubygrammar-grammarians mailing list
>removed_email_address@domain.invalid
>http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygrammar-...
>

This seems applicable to JRuby (since it's in ANTLR which is in Java).
How
else might it be used?

Phil
David V. (Guest)
on 2006-02-18 16:48
(Received via mailing list)
DÅ?a Sobota 18 Február 2006 07:28 Phil T. napísal:
> This seems applicable to JRuby (since it's in ANTLR which is in Java).
>

Not necessarily, it should be useful for all sorts of toolchains - it's
just
not possible to invoke it from a Ruby app. It might also be interesting
to
port this to pure Ruby once the ANTLR Ruby backend matures. (Correct me
if
already did since I last checked.) Having a proper Ruby parser in Ruby
might
make writing tools like RDoc much easier.

David V.
MenTaLguY (Guest)
on 2006-02-18 21:18
(Received via mailing list)
On Sat, 2006-02-18 at 23:46 +0900, David V. wrote:

> Not necessarily, it should be useful for all sorts of toolchains -
> it's just not possible to invoke it from a Ruby app. It might also be
> interesting to port this to pure Ruby once the ANTLR Ruby backend
> matures. (Correct me if already did since I last checked.)

I think it's pretty mature now actually, though I haven't played with
it.  The Ruby backend is part of ANTLR v3, though.  yawl's grammar is
for v2.

Martin (the author of the v3 Ruby backend) has a partial v3 Ruby grammar
in TRGP SVN now; I don't know whether we'll ultimately polish that up,
or port yawl's grammar to v3.  At the moment, Ter's leaning towards the
latter, as it's more complete.  But we'll see how it goes.

> Having a proper Ruby parser in Ruby might make writing tools like RDoc
> much easier.

That's the plan.  Not to mention Ruby implementations like JRuby.

I've actually got some evil ideas for a Ruby-in-Javascript
implementation (Ruby in the browser, yay!), but I'm not touching that
one until we have a decent parser waiting in the wings.

-mental
unknown (Guest)
on 2006-02-18 21:39
(Received via mailing list)
In article <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>,
David V.  <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>already did since I last checked.) Having a proper Ruby parser in Ruby migh=
>t=20
>make writing tools like RDoc much easier.
>

Quite true.  It's been our 'holy grail' for several years now.  I was
not aware
taht ANTLR could generate a pure Ruby parser.

....of course there is Ripper (not sure what the current status is) and
other
similar projects like ParseTree, nodeTree, etc.

Phil
MenTaLguY (Guest)
on 2006-02-18 22:49
(Received via mailing list)
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 04:38 +0900, Phil T. wrote:
> Quite true.  It's been our 'holy grail' for several years now.  I was not aware
> taht ANTLR could generate a pure Ruby parser.

The Ruby backend will be new with ANTLR v3.

> ....of course there is Ripper (not sure what the current status is) and other
> similar projects like ParseTree, nodeTree, etc.

Ripper, ParseTree, etc more or less piggyback on the existing parser in
the current Ruby interpreter.

-mental
David V. (Guest)
on 2006-02-19 14:09
(Received via mailing list)
DÅ?a Sobota 18 Február 2006 20:38 Phil T. napísal:
> Quite true.  It's been our 'holy grail' for several years now.  I was not
> aware taht ANTLR could generate a pure Ruby parser.
>
> ....of course there is Ripper (not sure what the current status is) and
> other similar projects like ParseTree, nodeTree, etc.
>

Not to diss all those projects, but ANTLR has that "major" ting to it.
Even if
we had other flawless pure ruby parsers, having an ANTLR grammar around
for
all manners of "Ruby in not-Ruby" weirdness seems to definately to have
perks
by itself.

I wonder if mental is petting a white persia cat plotting his evil
plan...

David V.
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.