4 ms·
> To see how it's syntactically simpler than S-exps (...) Has anyone ever complained that S-expr were too complex? Adding white noise as a tradeoff doesn't see
by simplotek 4y ago
> To see how it's syntactically simpler than S-exps (...)
Has anyone ever complained that S-expr were too complex? Adding white noise as a tradeoff doesn't seem like a win.
- avmich 4y ago> Has anyone ever complained that S-expr were too complex? Ask parser writers, I guess? I had some similar devices, explicitly made so that the overall set of parsing rules would be clear, so the idea is likely not too new.
- simplotek 4y ago> Ask parser writers, I guess? I've written many parsers, including for s-expr following rivest's RFC. S-expr take about half a dozen states to pull. A packrat parser for s-expr can fit in a single page. You don't even have to scroll to see the whole implementation. What are you talking about? What exactly do you feel parser writers will tell you regarding s-expr?