
Yet another introduction to yacc - ingve
https://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/yaity
======
buserror
I was really proficient at yacc/bison before, but a while back I completely
changed toolset and now use exclusively Ragel [0] for all my parser needs.

Ragel allows you to make partial parsers and all kind of useful things; it's
also a LOT easier to integrate in codebases.

[0]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ragel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ragel)

------
jshawl
webcache if bounced via Not Secure label -
[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https:...](https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/yaity)

------
mbrodersen
Stop using yacc. Seriously. There are _much_ better tools out there.

~~~
feelin_googley
"Stop using yacc!" I am fascinated by this sentiment. I have seen it before in
HN comments. This is almost as amusing as the "eradicate C" campaign.

To check whether this HN commentary has any basis in reality, I have been
passively compiling a list of all the software I find that uses yacc or bison.

I have been reassured of how prevalently it is used. Not only is it found
throughout bases of popular UNIX distributions but it is also being used in
third party programs, some of which are popular among HN readers.

If you do not like yacc/bison and there are "better" tools available to you I
cannot see why you would try to persuade others to stop using it. Strange.

Based on my research so far, yacc/bison is still popular amongst programmers
who actually write and distribute open source software.

How popular it is amongst programmers who comment on HN is another matter.
Perplexing.

