Neither of your suggestions worked for me. Both gave me the same basic "do_parse_virtual: can't convert from 'const scanner_t' to 'const boost::spirit::rule<T0>::scanner_t &'". I had a suspision about the phrase vs char thing... good to know. So should I be looking for a compiler fix or an alternate path? Still plugging away... no joy yet. --Mark Storer Senior Software Engineer Verity, Inc.

-----Original Message----- From: boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org]On Behalf Of Jeff Flinn Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 10:52 AM To: boost-users@lists.boost.org Subject: [Boost-users] Re: Tweaking the Skip Parser,was RE: Spirit 1.6 with VC6

Mark,

I didn't mean to imply this was the only way to accomplish what you want to do. You can create a full fledged grammar and use it as your skip parser. Or, create a functor_parser, which works for me.

struct SkipperDct { typedef int result_t;

template< typename ScannerT > int operator()( ScannerT const& scan, result_t& )const { match<> m = ( +space_p | lexeme_d[ comment_p("//") | comment_nest_p("/*","*/") ] ).parse( scan );

return m? m.length() : -1; } };

functor_parser<SkipperDct> SkipperDct_p;

};

Also note the use of 'comment_nest_p'.

Jeff F

...

...

No chance of switching to 7.1? :-)

Things are looking up. We just did a project-wide upgrade to... VC7.1. Problem solved. I'm now merrily writing rules for my JavaScript parser. It doesn't have to support the whole language (not for a while, maybe never), I just need to be able to parse out the names and locations of all the functions in a file. It's for a JavaScript editor built into one of our

"Mark Storer" wrote in message news:076D1E704127414E9FEAFFC31F66C9472739CD@vrsdex1.verity.com... products, and later we'll be adding auto-completion. That'll require a more thorough parser, but for now, I'm just after funciton locations.

...

So far so good... though I'll undoubtedly be quite familiar with the

BOOST_SPIRIT_DEBUG* macros before I'm done.

...

I've got another Spirit question: I've been adding

"*comment" throughout the rules and it's getting tiresome:

...

rule blockComment = comment_p( "/*", "*/" ); rule lineComment = comment_p( "//" ); rule comment = blockComment | lineComment;

Spraying the "comment" rule liberally through my rules is

an option...

...

rule codeBlock = ch_p('{') >>

*(comment | codeBlock | ~ch_p('}')) >> ch_p('}');

...

... but not an appealing one. This becomes particularly

true once I start working on the auto-completion parser.

...

It just occured to me that if the skip parser ate

comments for me, it would greatly simplify my rules. I'd like to tweak the skip parser so it skips over my "comment" rule as well as white space. I just took a stab at this, but didn't get very far. I tried:

...

parse(str, rules, space_p | comment)

but that resulted in a compiler error. 7.1's errors are

MUCH easier to read that 6's. I'm going to like this new compiler.

...

C:\SDKs\boost_1_31_0\boost\spirit\core\non_terminal\impl\rule. ipp(190): error C2664: 'boost::spirit::impl::abstract_parser::do_pars e_virtual' : cannot convert parameter 1 from 'const scanner_t' to 'const boost::spirit::rule<T0>::scanner_t &'

...

with [

ScannerT=boost::spirit::ruleboost::spirit::phrase_scanner_t: :scanner_t,

...

AttrT=boost::spirit::ruleboost::spirit::phrase_scanner_t::attr_t

...

] and [ T0=boost::spirit::phrase_scanner_t ]

Pointing me to the relevant section of the docs is an

acceptable answer, though I wouldn't mind a little more info than that. ;)

...

I'll keep plugging away. If I come up with an answer, I'll

post it to the list. I'd expect this to be useful to other beginners at the very least.

...

--Mark Storer Senior Software Engineer Verity, Inc.

_______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users