Using antlr for kdev4

Jakob Petsovits jpetso at
Fri Dec 1 00:42:23 UTC 2006

On Friday, 1. December 2006 01:01, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> Especially being able to use *,? and co within parser
> rules (or does bison allow for that? I did not read its huge manual, so
> I might not know yet).

I don't think it does. That might also stem from the fact that it's easier for 
LL(k) parsers like ANTLR to implement those operators than it is for LALR(1) 
parsers like bison.

If you're using ANTLR, mind the difference between the two approaches.

> I also see that kdevelop3 used antlr for some of its language supports,
> so I am asking what the optinions of the other kdev4 developers are
> about using antlr for the qmake parser?

recognizing that you seem to be more comfortable with ANTLR than with 
flex/bison, and having argued against kdev-pg in this case, I'd say go for 
it. ANTLR is a neat tool, and I see no reason not to use it for the qmake 

Just mind the difference between LL(k) and LALR(1).


More information about the KDevelop-devel mailing list