Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Irony.NET

Irony.NET

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
csharpcomquestiondiscussion
26 Posts 20 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • E El Corazon

    Paul Conrad wrote:

    Okay, there is a certain poem about her, but I don't know if it is even Soapbox-friendly

    if we know the same poetry, it isn't. ;P

    _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)

    P Offline
    P Offline
    Paul Conrad
    wrote on last edited by
    #17

    :laugh:

    "I guess it's what separates the professionals from the drag and drop, girly wirly, namby pamby, wishy washy, can't code for crap types." - Pete O'Hanlon

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • M martin_hughes

      No, not Pete's newest invention (that's Sarcasm.NET, which supersedes CausticRetort.NET), but Irony.NET[^] has anybody used it? If so, what do you think?

      S Offline
      S Offline
      Super Lloyd
      wrote on last edited by
      #18

      I mostly used ANTLR. At a first glance it seems easier to me to design huge grammar with ANTLR than it is with Irony. But it looks like it's worth a try....

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • J Jim Crafton

        He lost me at: "Unlike most existing yacc/lex-style solutions Irony does not employ any scanner or parser code generation from grammar specifications written in proprietary meta-language. " What?!? Since when is the BNF/EBNF form used by yacc/lex and variants "proprietary"? What he's describing smells a lot like Spirit[^] And finally it's a stupid name. "Irony"? Please, puhhhlease give your project some meaningful name, not just random nouns/verbs/adjectives etc. Gahhh! So once I can get past all that, I guess I might be interested in it, I suppose.

        ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog

        B Offline
        B Offline
        Brady Kelly
        wrote on last edited by
        #19

        Jim Crafton wrote:

        Please, puhhhlease give your project some meaningful name,

        NACC? Dex?

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • J Jim Crafton

          He lost me at: "Unlike most existing yacc/lex-style solutions Irony does not employ any scanner or parser code generation from grammar specifications written in proprietary meta-language. " What?!? Since when is the BNF/EBNF form used by yacc/lex and variants "proprietary"? What he's describing smells a lot like Spirit[^] And finally it's a stupid name. "Irony"? Please, puhhhlease give your project some meaningful name, not just random nouns/verbs/adjectives etc. Gahhh! So once I can get past all that, I guess I might be interested in it, I suppose.

          ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog

          J Offline
          J Offline
          James Curran
          wrote on last edited by
          #20

          "Irony" comes from "IronPython" & "IronRuby" (Microsoft .Net implementations of Python & Ruby). The mime has carried over to IronScheme, IronLisp and IronLogo among others. Hence "Irony" is for building "Iron*" languages.

          Truth, James

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • R realJSOP

            Is there an aluminumy.net, or a steely.net?

            "Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
            -----
            "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001

            L Offline
            L Offline
            Lilith C
            wrote on last edited by
            #21

            John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:

            Is there an aluminumy.net, or a steely.net?

            Not.YET .

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • J Jim Crafton

              He lost me at: "Unlike most existing yacc/lex-style solutions Irony does not employ any scanner or parser code generation from grammar specifications written in proprietary meta-language. " What?!? Since when is the BNF/EBNF form used by yacc/lex and variants "proprietary"? What he's describing smells a lot like Spirit[^] And finally it's a stupid name. "Irony"? Please, puhhhlease give your project some meaningful name, not just random nouns/verbs/adjectives etc. Gahhh! So once I can get past all that, I guess I might be interested in it, I suppose.

              ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog

              S Offline
              S Offline
              Sarsipius
              wrote on last edited by
              #22

              Jim Crafton wrote:

              He lost me at: "Unlike most existing yacc/lex-style solutions Irony does not employ any scanner or parser code generation from grammar specifications written in proprietary meta-language. " What?!? Since when is the BNF/EBNF form used by yacc/lex and variants "proprietary"?

              Allow me to translate for you: "We find it too difficult to parse BNF into C#, so rather than generate the code for you, you have to do it yourself." That's where the Irony comes in. They built a parser, but can't parse BNF themselves.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • M martin_hughes

                No, not Pete's newest invention (that's Sarcasm.NET, which supersedes CausticRetort.NET), but Irony.NET[^] has anybody used it? If so, what do you think?

                N Offline
                N Offline
                NimitySSJ
                wrote on last edited by
                #23

                It seems like a modern version of Spirit, the Boost library's C++ compiler builder. It used overloading and templates to allow you to write code that looked a lot like a standard grammar. There were classes or objects available to control the parsing. So, at first glance, the opening paragraph makes me think this is Spirit#. I still think GoldBuilder is one of the best language definers, as all I have to write is an LALR engine supporting the file format.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • M Maximilien

                  What next ? Ironing.NET ? Your code is as flat as possible.

                  Maximilien Lincourt Your Head A Splode - Strong Bad

                  U Offline
                  U Offline
                  urbane tiger
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #24

                  I like Krypto.Net - especially good at hiding information, and the bugs :)

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • M martin_hughes

                    No, not Pete's newest invention (that's Sarcasm.NET, which supersedes CausticRetort.NET), but Irony.NET[^] has anybody used it? If so, what do you think?

                    D Offline
                    D Offline
                    Daniel Flower
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #25

                    I'm currently writing a (GW) BASIC-to-JavaScript compiler using Irony.NET (CodeProject article coming soon). I think Irony.NET is a brilliant project as it allows you to write an interpreter without really needing to do any scanner/parsing implementation, and just having everything in .NET code makes it seem so much more convenient than using, say, LEX or something. It's a little scant on documentation though.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • J Jim Crafton

                      He lost me at: "Unlike most existing yacc/lex-style solutions Irony does not employ any scanner or parser code generation from grammar specifications written in proprietary meta-language. " What?!? Since when is the BNF/EBNF form used by yacc/lex and variants "proprietary"? What he's describing smells a lot like Spirit[^] And finally it's a stupid name. "Irony"? Please, puhhhlease give your project some meaningful name, not just random nouns/verbs/adjectives etc. Gahhh! So once I can get past all that, I guess I might be interested in it, I suppose.

                      ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog

                      D Offline
                      D Offline
                      dmitri_sps
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #26

                      They changed the word "proprietary" to "specialized" on the day you posted the critics. Now it is even more grand: looks like Irony.NET introduces a new non-"Specialized" grammar meta-language. I think what happends is that the guys write a tool for certain code generation, like many people do for various reasons. They publish its source - it's a useful tool, and some people may like it. But it's not enough: they want to place some foundation, add some claim for theoretical break-through. And in doing so, they fully adopt Microsoft approach: claim it's open standard, universal, generic, etc. In reality, 1) it is .NET specific - would you want to write a Java parser for what they call an "expression grammar"??? 2) it is not documented - they have samples, but what is a grammar of their grammar? Will it start with "using System;" literal ?? So... do not take it serious. It's just another tool.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      • Login

                      • Don't have an account? Register

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • World
                      • Users
                      • Groups