From: dmtr on
>
> > ANTLR
>
> I don't know if it's that easy to get started with though. The
> companion for-pay book is *most excellent*, but it seems to have been
> written to the detriment of the normal online docs.
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
> --http://blog.rebertia.com


IMO ANTLR is much easier to use compared to any other tool simply
because it has excellent GUI (the quality of which is amazing).
From: Stefan Behnel on
dmtr, 03.05.2010 07:39:
>>> ANTLR
>>
>> I don't know if it's that easy to get started with though. The
>> companion for-pay book is *most excellent*, but it seems to have been
>> written to the detriment of the normal online docs.
>
> IMO ANTLR is much easier to use compared to any other tool simply
> because it has excellent GUI (the quality of which is amazing).

See? Explanations help more than bold statements.

Stefan

From: andrew cooke on
On May 2, 3:54 pm, Andreas Löscher <andreas.loesc...(a)s2005.tu-
chemnitz.de> wrote:
> Hi,
> I am looking for an easy to use parser. I am want to get an overview
> over parsing and want to try to get some information out of a C-Header
> file. Which parser would you recommend?
>
> Best,
> Andreas

I develop Lepl - http://www.acooke.org/lepl/

I think it's easy to use, and other people have said the documentation
is fairly good. It doesn't have a GUI like Antlr, but it is recursive
descent rather and completely implemented in Python, which (I think)
makes it easier to understand and extend.

Cheers,
Andrew
From: Andreas Löscher on
Am Sonntag, den 02.05.2010, 21:54 +0200 schrieb Andreas Löscher:
> Hi,
> I am looking for an easy to use parser. I am want to get an overview
> over parsing and want to try to get some information out of a C-Header
> file. Which parser would you recommend?
>
> Best,
> Andreas
>
Thanks for your answers. I think I will have a look at ANTLR to do some
parsing.

Best,
Andreas