Re: RFC: Extracting the action transformation from the scanner

[Hans Aberg]

On 25 Aug 2005, at 19:04, Paul Eggert wrote:

> M4 sounded like a nice idea at first, but in retrospect perhaps we
> should have left well enough alone.  People have submitted
> replacements (one based on Python, another on Scheme) but I'm not sure
> they're enough of an improvement to be worth the hassle.
>
> Perhaps it'd be better to drop the postprocessor phase entirely; it's
> nice in some respects, but I'm afraid it's turning out to be more
> trouble than it's worth.

What do you have in your mind here? I.e., how should the parser code  
be generated without postprocessing?

  Hans Aberg