Mail Archives: djgpp/1999/06/30/12:47:30
Christopher Nelson wrote:
> > But, lexical tie-ins and scope resolution are not required for what I
> was
> >doing. All I was oringinally trying to do was to find things that look
> like
> >function declarations. I wasn't really conserned with validating the
> return
> >type. In my parser:
> >
> >myType myFunc(int a, char**&);
> >
> >would be a valid prototype even if "myType" was not previously defined. My
> >program is only designed to be run on code that cleanly compiles and thus
> does
> >not require strict validation of stuff like that.
>
> ah. :-) Occam's Razor. what is it, like a source documentor?
Right now, it's a program that (when integrated into SetEdit or RHIDE using
a provided eLisp function) displays the prototype of a (partially) typed
function name. I posted (as Endlisnis) a link to the preliminary binary
distribution of it. <Note: Nortel Networks has no affiliation with Endlisnis
or any software he provides>
Eventually, it will display lists of struct/class/union members when the
"." key is hit. [hopefully, if I get support from SET] allowing you to just
choose from the list. It also plans on doing many other things which appear in
some commercial IDE's.
--
-Rolf Campbell
- Raw text -