librelist archives

« back to archive

Replacing doxyparser for clang

Replacing doxyparser for clang

From:
Lucas Moura
Date:
2015-04-23 @ 22:46
We are currently working on the feature to replace doxyparser for aparser
that uses clang AST to analyze C\C++ methods. We are currently studying a
perl bind for Clang, named p5-Clang, that parser through the AST tree.
However, we would like to know if we are going on the right direction when
considering the replacement of Doxyparse. Would it be better to populate
the Analizo model directly or by creating a file that resembles the one
created by Doxyparser and uses the already implemented class that populates
the Analizo model.

Obs: The repository for p5-clang can be found on the above link:
https://github.com/ghedo/p5-Clang

Att,
Lucas Albuquerque Medeiros de Moura

Re: [analizo] Replacing doxyparser for clang

From:
Lucas Kanashiro
Date:
2015-04-23 @ 23:34
Hi everyone :-)

On Thu, 23 Apr 2015 19:46:59 -0300
Lucas Moura <lucas.moura128@gmail.com> wrote:

> We are currently working on the feature to replace doxyparser for aparser
> that uses clang AST to analyze C\C++ methods. We are currently studying a
> perl bind for Clang, named p5-Clang, that parser through the AST tree.
> However, we would like to know if we are going on the right direction when
> considering the replacement of Doxyparse. Would it be better to populate
> the Analizo model directly or by creating a file that resembles the one
> created by Doxyparser and uses the already implemented class that populates
> the Analizo model.
> 

I think that implement a new Extractor class for Clang with the necessary 
methods (feed and actually_process at least) is better than reuse the 
Doxyparse one. If you create another class only to pass attributes to 
Doxyparse Extractor you will increase the coupling.

Cheers,
-- 
Lucas Kanashiro

Re: [analizo] Replacing doxyparser for clang

From:
Antonio Terceiro
Date:
2015-04-24 @ 11:21
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 08:34:49PM -0300, Lucas Kanashiro wrote:
> 
> Hi everyone :-)
> 
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2015 19:46:59 -0300
> Lucas Moura <lucas.moura128@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > We are currently working on the feature to replace doxyparser for aparser
> > that uses clang AST to analyze C\C++ methods. We are currently studying a
> > perl bind for Clang, named p5-Clang, that parser through the AST tree.
> > However, we would like to know if we are going on the right direction when
> > considering the replacement of Doxyparse. Would it be better to populate
> > the Analizo model directly or by creating a file that resembles the one
> > created by Doxyparser and uses the already implemented class that populates
> > the Analizo model.
> > 
> 
> I think that implement a new Extractor class for Clang with the
> necessary methods (feed and actually_process at least) is better than
> reuse the Doxyparse one. If you create another class only to pass
> attributes to Doxyparse Extractor you will increase the coupling.

+1

-- 
Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@softwarelivre.org>
http://softwarelivre.org/terceiro