Re: gnubol: Re: which parser tool

[Michael McKernan <mck@tivoli.mv.com>]

>>>>> "Tim" == Tim E Josling <TIMJOSLING@prodigy.net>
>>>>> wrote the following on Fri, 19 Nov 1999 02:44:13 +1000

  Tim> RKRayhawk@aol.com wrote:

  >> As some previous interaction has brought out, we can go after
  >> just valid programs or try to go after a larger class that
  >> includes likely errors and errors that would cause trouble if we
  >> don't aggress them.

  Tim> I don't really grok what you are saying about putting more
  Tim> into the parser.  I would see some simple error productions
  Tim> only. The challenge with cobol is to avoid throwing too much
  Tim> away. Waiting for a period is too long. Any good ideas to help
  Tim> with this are welcome.

I don't want to appear to be on the stump for pccts again and I don't
have direct experience with the feature, but pccts does offer
exception handlers for syntax errors.  It's possible to establish a
handler globally, on any rule or even on an alternative.  This looks
like a good way to resynch the parse at least.  Consider dlg's
#tokclass and consumeUntil function in this context.




--
This message was sent through the gnu-cobol mailing list.  To remove yourself
from this mailing list, send a message to majordomo@lusars.net with the
words "unsubscribe gnu-cobol" in the message body.  For more information on
the GNU COBOL project, send mail to gnu-cobol-owner@lusars.net.