Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Propsal draft: Block Header Parsing Tool

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 Gupta

On 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