People should please take away from this paper the central claim that they are offering up a fun, easy, and startlingly practical way to implement a parsing library in your favorite language / environment. It is but a few hundred lines in some functional languages. Scarcely importantly more in other languages. It is (per their plausible claims) a nice alternative to trying to muck up some dubious approximation using your regexp engine.
The "YACC is dead" claim of the original paper, and of this follow-up, is not so much "this is so good, everyone will stop using YACC". Rather, its that people don't use YACC when they ought to because it is inconvenient -- but this derivative-based parsing hack is convenient in important ways that YACC fails to be.
Comments
People should please take away from this paper the central claim that they are offering up a fun, easy, and startlingly practical way to implement a parsing library in your favorite language / environment. It is but a few hundred lines in some functional languages. Scarcely importantly more in other languages. It is (per their plausible claims) a nice alternative to trying to muck up some dubious approximation using your regexp engine.
The "YACC is dead" claim of the original paper, and of this follow-up, is not so much "this is so good, everyone will stop using YACC". Rather, its that people don't use YACC when they ought to because it is inconvenient -- but this derivative-based parsing hack is convenient in important ways that YACC fails to be.