Smacc debugger
Locked
 
|
Hi
where can I load the Smacc gt extension and debugger extensions? Stef |
|
|
They come with the ConfigurationOfSmaCC which is already in the Moose image.
Doru > On Mar 27, 2017, at 4:52 PM, Stephane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Hi > > where can I load the Smacc gt extension and debugger extensions? > > Stef -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "Speaking louder won't make the point worthier." |
|
|
OK I loaded Smacc from github as mentioned by thierry. Metacello new baseline: 'SmaCC'; repository: 'github://ThierryGoubier/SmaCC'; load Are there two configurationOfSmacc? May be we should only have one no? I have the impression that even thierry and jason working heavily with Smacc do not know that. And we should not force them to use Moose. At least we do not have to win anything with it. Stef On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 6:31 PM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote: They come with the ConfigurationOfSmaCC which is already in the Moose image. |
|
|
Le 28/03/2017 à 11:50, Stephane Ducasse a écrit :
> OK > I loaded Smacc from github as mentioned by thierry. > > Metacello new > baseline: 'SmaCC'; > repository: 'github://ThierryGoubier/SmaCC'; > load > > Are there two configurationOfSmacc? > May be we should only have one no? > > I have the impression that even thierry and jason working heavily with > Smacc do not know that. I know there are two configurations of SmaCC. I told you, probably two days ago, that some syntax extensions for grammars may only be supported on one of those. > And we should not force them to use Moose. At least we do not have to win > anything with it. Thierry > Stef > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 6:31 PM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email] > <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: > > They come with the ConfigurationOfSmaCC which is already in the > Moose image. > > Doru > > > > On Mar 27, 2017, at 4:52 PM, Stephane Ducasse > <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > where can I load the Smacc gt extension and debugger extensions? > > > > Stef > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com <http://www.tudorgirba.com> > www.feenk.com <http://www.feenk.com> > > "Speaking louder won't make the point worthier." > > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Stephane Ducasse-3
Hi,
> On Mar 28, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Stephane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: > > OK > I loaded Smacc from github as mentioned by thierry. > > Metacello new > baseline: 'SmaCC'; > repository: 'github://ThierryGoubier/SmaCC'; > load > > Are there two configurationOfSmacc? > May be we should only have one no? > > I have the impression that even thierry and jason working heavily with Smacc do not know that. > And we should not force them to use Moose. At least we do not have to win > anything with it. I did not mean to force anyone to use Moose. I just said it is already loaded there, in case you use it. Moose relies on the ConfigurationOfSmaCC maintained by John. Thierry has another repository that he created before John moved his work to Pharo. But, now that he does work with Pharo Moose relies on his version. Cheers, Doru > > Stef > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 6:31 PM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote: > They come with the ConfigurationOfSmaCC which is already in the Moose image. > > Doru > > > > On Mar 27, 2017, at 4:52 PM, Stephane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > where can I load the Smacc gt extension and debugger extensions? > > > > Stef > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > www.feenk.com > > "Speaking louder won't make the point worthier." > > > -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "There are no old things, there are only old ways of looking at them." |
|
|
Ok I should say that I do not understand the differences and why there are two versions of Smacc. So I will stop maintaining the tutorial because now may be I should revert what I wrote. I was too stupid to do it in fact I should focus on my stuff and nothing else. This saddens me a lot. We are a small community and we split ourselves into little chunks. I do not get why there is no notion of economy and sharing in our culture. Stef On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote: Hi, |
|
|
So I browsed the mailing-list and I foind the mail of thierry saying that there is no difference. I will try to tools in moose then. On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 6:07 PM, Stephane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
|
|
2017-03-29 18:21 GMT+02:00 Stephane Ducasse <[hidden email]>:
Probably: the +, *, ?, ( ) in the grammar don't work anymore. As I told you: very few differences.
Thierry
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Stephane Ducasse-3
2017-03-29 18:07 GMT+02:00 Stephane Ducasse <[hidden email]>:
I also don't know why it was done that way. And I don't want to spend energy fighting it. Thierry
|
|
|
What I don't understand from this thread, and my apologies if it was expressed. But to me the question is not what or why happened in the past. Rather what is the way to proceed ahead with a single canonical source. This is what will benefit the community. What and where is that source. Shalom.
Jimmie Houchin
On 03/29/2017 12:25 PM, Thierry Goubier
wrote:
|
|
|
Hi Jimmie,
Le 29/03/2017 à 20:07, Jimmie Houchin a écrit : > What I don't understand from this thread, and my apologies if it was > expressed. But to me the question is not what or why happened in the > past. Rather what is the way to proceed ahead with a single canonical > source. This is what will benefit the community. What and where is that > source. I don't know. I will probably update the github repo by backporting the changes I'm interested in from the smalltalkhub repo, when I'll get the time to do it. There is little pressure to do so: both versions work perfectly well for its usual users, and they are close enough that documentation is the same for both. Tracking changes on the smalltalkhub repo is inconvenient, to say the least: this thing never sends anything to any watcher, to the difference of github, so you can't track anything about updates appearing there. On github, you can subscribe to updates... makes a world of a difference if you have to track a project. If you are still using an old parser on the previous SmaCC version (1.x), you'll have to get yet another SmaCC repository. Regards, Thierry > Shalom. > > > Jimmie Houchin > > > > On 03/29/2017 12:25 PM, Thierry Goubier wrote: >> >> >> 2017-03-29 18:07 GMT+02:00 Stephane Ducasse <[hidden email] >> <mailto:[hidden email]>>: >> >> Ok I should say that I do not understand the differences and why >> there are two versions of Smacc. >> So I will stop maintaining the tutorial because now may be I >> should revert what I wrote. >> I was too stupid to do it in fact I should focus on my stuff and >> nothing else. >> This saddens me a lot. >> We are a small community and we split ourselves into little chunks. >> I do not get why there is no notion of economy and sharing in our >> culture. >> >> >> I also don't know why it was done that way. And I don't want to spend >> energy fighting it. >> >> Thierry >> >> >> >> Stef >> >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email] >> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> > On Mar 28, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Stephane Ducasse >> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: >> > >> > OK >> > I loaded Smacc from github as mentioned by thierry. >> > >> > Metacello new >> > baseline: 'SmaCC'; >> > repository: 'github://ThierryGoubier/SmaCC'; >> > load >> > >> > Are there two configurationOfSmacc? >> > May be we should only have one no? >> > >> > I have the impression that even thierry and jason working >> heavily with Smacc do not know that. >> > And we should not force them to use Moose. At least we do >> not have to win >> > anything with it. >> >> I did not mean to force anyone to use Moose. I just said it is >> already loaded there, in case you use it. >> >> Moose relies on the ConfigurationOfSmaCC maintained by John. >> Thierry has another repository that he created before John >> moved his work to Pharo. But, now that he does work with Pharo >> Moose relies on his version. >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> > >> > Stef >> > >> > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 6:31 PM, Tudor Girba >> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: >> > They come with the ConfigurationOfSmaCC which is already in >> the Moose image. >> > >> > Doru >> > >> > >> > > On Mar 27, 2017, at 4:52 PM, Stephane Ducasse >> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi >> > > >> > > where can I load the Smacc gt extension and debugger >> extensions? >> > > >> > > Stef >> > >> > -- >> > www.tudorgirba.com <http://www.tudorgirba.com> >> > www.feenk.com <http://www.feenk.com> >> > >> > "Speaking louder won't make the point worthier." >> > >> > >> > >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com <http://www.tudorgirba.com> >> www.feenk.com <http://www.feenk.com> >> >> "There are no old things, there are only old ways of looking >> at them." >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Stephane Ducasse-3
Hi,
It is actually the economic reasoning that prevailed here. John was willing to invest effort to both work with and benefit from the Moose/GT environment. The consequence was that he built the GT extensions for SmaCC while Andrei and I offered a bit of support. In this process, we also got updates and fixes to several grammars that are now shipped with Moose. Furthermore, as John is the primary author of SmaCC it only makes sense that he gets to control what he maintains. As for the repository, I asked him kindly to keep it in SmalltalkHub at the beginning to make the integration with Moose cheaper and easier. Now, that the GitHub solution grows we can certainly consider moving it together with the rest of Moose. As for the need to have a fork of SmaCC, I think there is little need for that and John was always responsive to requests. Cheers, Doru > On Mar 29, 2017, at 6:21 PM, Stephane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: > > So I browsed the mailing-list and I foind the mail of thierry saying that there is no difference. > I will try to tools in moose then. > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 6:07 PM, Stephane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: > Ok I should say that I do not understand the differences and why there are two versions of Smacc. > So I will stop maintaining the tutorial because now may be I should revert what I wrote. > I was too stupid to do it in fact I should focus on my stuff and nothing else. > This saddens me a lot. > We are a small community and we split ourselves into little chunks. > I do not get why there is no notion of economy and sharing in our culture. > > Stef > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi, > > > On Mar 28, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Stephane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > OK > > I loaded Smacc from github as mentioned by thierry. > > > > Metacello new > > baseline: 'SmaCC'; > > repository: 'github://ThierryGoubier/SmaCC'; > > load > > > > Are there two configurationOfSmacc? > > May be we should only have one no? > > > > I have the impression that even thierry and jason working heavily with Smacc do not know that. > > And we should not force them to use Moose. At least we do not have to win > > anything with it. > > I did not mean to force anyone to use Moose. I just said it is already loaded there, in case you use it. > > Moose relies on the ConfigurationOfSmaCC maintained by John. Thierry has another repository that he created before John moved his work to Pharo. But, now that he does work with Pharo Moose relies on his version. > > Cheers, > Doru > > > > > Stef > > > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 6:31 PM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote: > > They come with the ConfigurationOfSmaCC which is already in the Moose image. > > > > Doru > > > > > > > On Mar 27, 2017, at 4:52 PM, Stephane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > where can I load the Smacc gt extension and debugger extensions? > > > > > > Stef > > > > -- > > www.tudorgirba.com > > www.feenk.com > > > > "Speaking louder won't make the point worthier." > > > > > > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > www.feenk.com > > "There are no old things, there are only old ways of looking at them." > > > > > > > -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "We cannot reach the flow of things unless we let go." |
|
|
In reply to this post by Thierry Goubier
Hi thierry Where can I find a documentation of +, * ? in the grammar (and especially how to manage the production)? And indeed they do not work in the Moose version. I think that if +, *, ?, ( ) are working in the grammar it is an important addition to Smacc. Because I found it right now verbose compare to ANTLR Stef On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Thierry Goubier <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
|
|
Le 31/03/2017 à 21:46, Stephane Ducasse a écrit :
> Hi thierry > > Where can I find a documentation of +, * ? in the grammar (and > especially how to manage the production)? formally, +, *, ? do behave as they are defined in BNF extensions. They are compiled by generating itermediate productions, as one does when it converts by hand: you can see the itermediate non-terminals generated if you look at the items and symbols of the compiled parser. > And indeed they do not work in the Moose version. They were probably introduced by lr in the 1.x series of SmaCC for Squeak. > I think that if +, *, ?, ( ) are working in the grammar it is an > important addition to Smacc. Because I found it right now verbose > compare to ANTLR Yes but the combination of AST annotations and those syntax extensions needs to be checked, and maybe adjusted, and I haven't done that yet. Thierry > Stef > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Thierry Goubier > <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: > > > > 2017-03-29 18:21 GMT+02:00 Stephane Ducasse <[hidden email] > <mailto:[hidden email]>>: > > So I browsed the mailing-list and I foind the mail of thierry > saying that there is no difference. > I will try to tools in moose then. > > > Probably: the +, *, ?, ( ) in the grammar don't work anymore. As I > told you: very few differences. > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 6:07 PM, Stephane Ducasse > <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: > > Ok I should say that I do not understand the differences and > why there are two versions of Smacc. > So I will stop maintaining the tutorial because now may be I > should revert what I wrote. > I was too stupid to do it in fact I should focus on my stuff > and nothing else. > This saddens me a lot. > We are a small community and we split ourselves into little > chunks. > I do not get why there is no notion of economy and sharing > in our culture. > > > Thierry > > > > Stef > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Tudor Girba > <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: > > Hi, > > > On Mar 28, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Stephane Ducasse <[hidden email] > <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: > > > > OK > > I loaded Smacc from github as mentioned by thierry. > > > > Metacello new > > baseline: 'SmaCC'; > > repository: 'github://ThierryGoubier/SmaCC'; > > load > > > > Are there two configurationOfSmacc? > > May be we should only have one no? > > > > I have the impression that even thierry and jason working heavily with Smacc do not know that. > > And we should not force them to use Moose. At least we do not have to win > > anything with it. > > I did not mean to force anyone to use Moose. I just said > it is already loaded there, in case you use it. > > Moose relies on the ConfigurationOfSmaCC maintained by > John. Thierry has another repository that he created > before John moved his work to Pharo. But, now that he > does work with Pharo Moose relies on his version. > > Cheers, > Doru > > > > > Stef > > > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 6:31 PM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: > > They come with the ConfigurationOfSmaCC which is already in the Moose image. > > > > Doru > > > > > > > On Mar 27, 2017, at 4:52 PM, Stephane Ducasse <[hidden email] > <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > where can I load the Smacc gt extension and debugger extensions? > > > > > > Stef > > > > -- > > www.tudorgirba.com <http://www.tudorgirba.com> > > www.feenk.com <http://www.feenk.com> > > > > "Speaking louder won't make the point worthier." > > > > > > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com <http://www.tudorgirba.com> > www.feenk.com <http://www.feenk.com> > > "There are no old things, there are only old ways of > looking at them." > > > > > > > > > |
«
Return to Pharo Smalltalk Users
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |