Re: [Cardinal-dev] There Is No Wheel

[Phil Tomson]

On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Sean Chittenden wrote:

> > > > > At this point I'm thinking that Ruth probably offers the best
> > > > > near-term solution.  Since it essentially uses Matz's parse.y
> > > > > it's compliant.  We can get an AST out of it.  From the AST we
> > > > > can produce PIR which can be fed into imcc (at least that's
> > > > > how I understand that it should be done).
> > > >
> > > > The announcement of the current version
> > > > (http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/33555)
> > > > describes the parser as "painfully incomplete".
> > > >
> > > > Does _ANYONE_ (besides Matz in the ruby source) have a parser
> > > > that can reliably take ruby code and return an AST?  I don't
> > > > want to reinvent the wheel, but it's starting to look like there
> > > > is no wheel.
> > >
> > > http://www.pragmaticprogrammer.com/ruby/downloads/files/nodeDump-0.1.7.tgz
> >
> > nodeDump prints out a representation of the internal parsetree for a
> > Ruby program, but as far as I can tell, it doesn't return an AST
> > that can be walked from within Ruby.
>
> What format would you like it in though?  -sc
>

A tree of node objects that can be walked from within Ruby.  It can be
added to nodeDump, but this is kind of what Ruth is doing.

Phil