On 11/7/06, Ryan Hanks <ryandhanks / gmail.com> wrote:
> p.s.  it's my understanding that ruby-* requires flex and yacc, while rex
> and racc are pure ruby (please correct me if I'm wrong).  That being said,
> I'm mostly interested in functionality and ease-of-implementation
> differences between the two pairs of packages...
>
> p.p.s. as I said, I'm looking to build a parser for CSS2.  might there be an
> entirely different parser generator for ruby that I should be looking to use
> given the nature of the grammar (
> http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-CSS2-19980512/grammar.html) I'm looking to
> parse (such as tdp4r http://rubyforge.org/projects/tdp4r/)?
>
> Thanks again.
>
> On 11/7/06, Ryan Hanks <ryandhanks / gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm new to lex and yacc and trying to use one of their ruby derivatives to
> > build a parser for level 2 cascading style-sheets (CSS2).  I'm having
> > trouble deciding whether to use rex & racc or ruby-lex & ruby-yacc.  Can
> > someone help me out by explaining to me the ramifications of choosing
> > between these two?  Does anyone have a particular preference for one over
> > the other?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ryan Hanks

Maybe Antlr and/or ragel could be useful, though I don;t know anything
about them  except that:

Ragel is used to create http parser in mongrel, Antlr was mentioned
here sometime ago. Unfortunately I don't remember the topic - try
searching if it interests you.