Hello everyone,
Thanks for the detailed review.
I have made changes to my proposal, as per the discussion in the previous emails and also included the timeline changes.
Please review the updated version of my proposal.
As a precursor to the actual project, I experimented with a rudimentary prototype of a parser for C++ header files using Pygccxml, which can be found at https://github.com/aru31/parser-prototype
Proposal Link: https://aru31.github.io/gsoc-proposal.pdf
Github Repository Link: https://github.com/aru31/GSoC-Proposal
Thanks
Regards,
Arpit Gupta
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:05 PM Arpit Gupta <guptarpit1997@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Nicolas and Martin,Thank you again for answering all my queries.I will definitely make the changes suggested in the timeline.By "both the tools", I meant that there would be an option to use any one of the following parsers.Thanks!Regards,Arpit GuptaOn Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 10:53 PM Martin Braun <martin.braun@ettus.com> wrote:On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 03:36:21PM +0530, Arpit Gupta wrote:
> Happy Holi everyone (holi is an Indian festival of colors)
>
> Thank you Nicolas for your valuable response
>
> I understood all your points and will surely make changes in the proposal.
>
> The tools here I referred are both pygccxml and libclang.
>
> There is trade off for both the tools:-
>
> 1). Pygccxml takes up a quite a bit of computation time while libclang is
> better in this case.
>
> 2). Pygccxml is quite mature and also has a proper documentation which
> gives it advantage over libclang.
>
> 3). Pygccxml generates a nice AST which is really understandable and easy
> to work with while this is not the case in libclang.
>
> 4). Still libclang is really popular C++ parsing tool and is under
> continuous development which gives us an excellent opportunity to explore
> it.
>
> So, I think itâ**s worth it to use both of them to parse header files.
>
> I definitely know that the most important part of the project is about
> extracting most of the information from the header files, but I thought
> that the ultimate goal is to create YAML files for the GRC. I will
> definitely make these changes and Iâ**m really sorry for the confusion
> created due to this in the proposal.
>
> So, Should I proceed using both the tools?
Do you mean, use both tools at the same time, or have an option to use
either tool?
-- M
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
No comments:
Post a Comment