Hi Boosters, I've written a C++ syntax analysis library using Boost.Spirit. (This 'library' is actually a subset of the Scalpel library. I talked about it in the Boost mailing list here: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/208217 ) For the sake of brevity, let's call it Salsa (for Stand-ALone Syntax Analysis). While most C++ compilers need semantic information to perform the syntax analysis, Salsa is a standalone syntax analyzer. Its Spirit grammar doesn't run any semantic action. Consequently, you can use it to parse some C++ code without having to analyze a whole translation unit (i.e. without processing #include directives). At this point, you may wonder how syntax ambiguities are managed. In most cases, there's always an interpretation which is more obvious than the other one(s). In all cases, you may reasonably ask the programmer to disambiguate its code. Whatever the case, Salsa (predictably) chooses one of the interpretations. Here are some examples: The following statement…: a * b; … may be either a multiplication or a pointer declaration. The default interpretation is the pointer declaration. You can reasonably ask the programmer to disambiguate the code by putting parenthesis if he wants the syntax analyzer to interpret it as the former: (a * b); Trickier. In the following declaration…: bool bool_ = a< b || c> (d&& e); … the right-hand side expression may be either a boolean expression (where 'a', 'b', 'c', 'd' and 'e' are variables of type bool) or a function template call (whose name is 'a', which takes one bool template parameter and where 'b', 'c', 'd' and 'e' are all variables of type const bool). The default interpretation is the boolean expression. Once again, you can reasonably ask the programmer to disambiguate the code by putting parenthesis if he wants Salsa to interpret it as the latter: bool bool_ = a< (b || c)> (d&& e); (Actually, I wonder why the standard allows such ambiguities.) Note: Salsa isn't finalized yet, but it successfully parses Apache's implementation of the C++ standard library. I'd like to know: is there a reasonable chance that such a library will be accepted into Boost?