antlr4

Owl is much more limited. That's not a problem because the documentation tells outright what it can and can't do and what it's for; experts can get things done better if we have specialised tools for different tasks. ANTLR claims to be a general parser¹ but it falls short of its promise. People should stop using it; the software is popular only due to its relentless marketing, but not actually very good. It does not return all possible results for ambiguous grammars. It fails dozens of torture tests, including any grammar that's left-recursive, those cause the software to abort at compile time. You can't simply implement a huge number of language descriptions with it. Instead of simply admitting the algorithm's flaw, the maintainer would rather misdirect in bug reports. I find this disgusting. If you want a general parser that does not di