[ragel-users] Alternative syntax for Ragel spec blocks

[Denis Naumov]

Alternative syntax for Ragel spec blocks.

Ragel uses code block syntax typical for other lexical generators (
%%{...}%% ).
But as a rule, we edit *.rl the file in some IDE and type of editor for
*.rl file and for main code file is the same.
I.e. if we use C++, then *.rl is often also edited as C++ the file.
Using %%{...}%% blocks break IDE code analisis as C++(or other) code.

It would be good if Ragel could maintain "comment syntax" of code blocks in
style like Re2C:
    /*!ragel
        <multi-line FSM spec>
    */
    //!ragel <single-line FSM spec>

"comment syntax" can be implement all languages with C-style comments.

With "comment syntax" *.rl file would IDE frendly:
- *.rl the file is 100% correct c/c++/java file.
- syntax highlighting of the source code - works correctly.
- IntelliSence, auto-formatting and so on - works correctly.

Ragel can process %%{...}%% and /*! ragel... */ syntax at the same time or
to use a special option (for example, --syntax=general/comment)

Example:
--- general ragel ragel file ------------------
#include <string.h>
#include <stdio.h>

%%{
    machine foo;
    main := ( 'foo' | 'bar' ) 0 @{ res = 1; };
}%%

%% write data;

int main( int argc, char **argv )
{
    int cs, res = 0;

    if ( argc > 1 ) {
        char *p = argv[1];
        char *pe = p + strlen(p) + 1;
        %% write init;
        %% write exec;
    }

    printf("result = %i\n", res );
    return 0;
}
-----------------------------------------------

--- IDE frendly ragel file --------------------
#include <string.h>
#include <stdio.h>

/*!ragel
    machine foo;
    main := ( 'foo' | 'bar' ) 0 @{ res = 1; };
*/

//!ragel write data;

int main( int argc, char **argv )
{
    int cs, res = 0;
    if ( argc > 1 ) {
        char *p = argv[1];
        char *pe = p + strlen(p) + 1;
        //!ragel write init;
        //!ragel write exec;
    }
    printf("result = %i\n", res );
    return 0;
}
-----------------------------------------------

What do you think?

Thanks for good tool.

Best regards,
Denis.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.colm.net/pipermail/ragel-users/attachments/20190413/61484a48/attachment.html>