Search Results

Search found 2 results on 1 pages for 'diederich kroeske'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

  • Flex, continuous scanning stream (from socket). Did I miss something using yywrap()?

    - by Diederich Kroeske
    Working on a socketbased scanner (continuous stream) using Flex for pattern recognition. Flex doesn't find a match that overlaps 'array bounderies'. So I implemented yywrap() to setup new array content as soon yylex() detects < (it will call yywrap). No success so far. Basically (for pin-pointing my problem) this is my code: %{ #include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdlib.h> #define BUFFERSIZE 26 /* 0123456789012345678901234 */ char cbuf1[BUFFERSIZE] = "Hello everybody, lex is su"; // Warning, no '\0' char cbuf2[BUFFERSIZE] = "per cool. Thanks! "; char recvBuffer[BUFFERSIZE]; int packetCnt = 0; YY_BUFFER_STATE bufferState1, bufferState2; %} %option nounput %option noinput %% "super" { ECHO; } . { printf( "%c", yytext[0] );} %% int yywrap() { int retval = 1; printf(">> yywrap()\n"); if( packetCnt <= 0 ) // Stop after 2 { // Copy cbuf2 into recvBuffer memcpy(recvBuffer, cbuf2, BUFFERSIZE); // yyrestart(NULL); // ?? has no effect // Feed new data to flex bufferState2 = yy_scan_bytes(recvBuffer, BUFFERSIZE); // packetCnt++; // Tell flex to resume scanning retval = 0; } return(retval); } int main(void) { printf("Lenght: %d\n", (int)sizeof(recvBuffer)) ; // Copy cbuf1 into recvBuffer memcpy(recvBuffer, cbuf1, BUFFERSIZE); // packetCnt = 0; // bufferState1 = yy_scan_bytes(recvBuffer, BUFFERSIZE); // yylex(); yy_delete_buffer(bufferState1); yy_delete_buffer(bufferState2); return 0; } This is my output: dkmbpro:test dkroeske$ ./text Lenght: 26 Hello everybody, lex is su>> yywrap() per cool. Thanks! >> yywrap() So no match on 'super'. According to the doc the lexxer is not 'reset' between yywrap's. What do I miss? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • What did Rich Hickey mean when he said, "All that specificity [of interfaces/classes/types] kills your reuse!"

    - by GlenPeterson
    In Rich Hickey's thought-provoking goto conference keynote "The Value of Values" at 29 minutes he's talking about the overhead of a language like Java and makes a statement like, "All those interfaces kill your reuse." What does he mean? Is that true? In my search for answers, I have run across: The Principle of Least Knowledge AKA The Law of Demeter which encourages airtight API interfaces. Wikipedia also lists some disadvantages. Kevlin Henney's Imperial Clothing Crisis which argues that use, not reuse is the appropriate goal. Jack Diederich's "Stop Writing Classes" talk which argues against over-engineering in general. Clearly, anything written badly enough will be useless. But how would the interface of a well-written API prevent that code from being used? There are examples throughout history of something made for one purpose being used more for something else. But in the software world, if you use something for a purpose it wasn't intended for, it usually breaks. I'm looking for one good example of a good interface preventing a legitimate but unintended use of some code. Does that exist? I can't picture it.

    Read the article

1