> My plan is to rewrite the #emitFor<X>:on: -family with one (or a few)
> Visitor(s). In this way being able to encapsulate information only
> belonging there. And at the same time gain the possibility of making
> related compilers by inheritance. Probably I'll do the same with
> #sizeFor<X>:. It is possible to go further than that but this seems about
> right.

Yes, that and the printing-stuff. It was for exact that reason that I wrote
the simple enumerator I posted a while back. Just being able to walk the
parse tree will prove very flexible (especially for the tool builders and
language players amongst us :) ). In my (VisualWorks) experience), I did not
measure much performance difference between a visitor-style approach and a
'direct' implementation.

> The Parser will not inherit from Scanner but will refer to a Scanner.
> This adds flexibility which is sometimes good to have. And it is in
> accordance with my general view of how to handle syntax. I don't think
> it will run slower but I havn't measured it.

I don;t think it should. Anyway, from an experimentation standpoint, it
would be much better...

> If you have comments at this eary stage, welcome. My hope is that it will
> make it a bit "simplified and clarified" and more flexible.

I am quite sure it will. And about comments: I am willing to participate
actively in the development of this (since we directly benefit from this).
So, if you need a hand whan yoy start playing around :)

PS: you might want to know that this year's ESUG Summer School has invited
Eliot Miranda to give a talk (see www.esug.org). Maybe this is of interest
of you...


--
Roel Wuyts                    Programming Technology Lab
rwuyts at vub.ac.be              Vrije Universiteit Brussel
http://prog.vub.ac.be/~rwuyts
Webmaster of European Smalltalk User Group: www.esug.org