Re: glm syntax

[Ben Pfaff]

John Darrington <address@hidden> writes:

> Frankly, I'm slowly beginning to come around to Ben's way of thinking;
> that q2c is more trouble than it's worth ...

I think I can design a replacement that's much better.  I have a
bunch of ideas on paper that I'd like to try out.  But I also
have a bunch of ideas on paper for a greatly improved output
subsystem (from both a user and a developer point of view).  I
don't know which is more urgent; I can't do both at once.

These projects correspond to two items in the README, for what
it's worth:

        * Easy-to-use support for parsing language syntax.  Currently,
          parsing is done by writing "recursive descent" code by hand,
          with some support for automated parsing of the most common
          constructs.  We wish to improve the situation by supplying a
          more complete and flexible parser generator.

        * Easy-to-use support for producing attractive output.
          Currently, output is done by writing code to explicitly fill
          in table cells with data.  We should be able to supply a
          more convenient interface that also allows for providing
          machine-readable output.

-- 
Ben Pfaff 
http://benpfaff.org