Parsing style [Was: [plt-scheme] proof checking: a subproblem]

Vague cultural question - is recursive descent parsing with combinators
not that common in the scheme world?  I have more of a background in
Haskell and this question would have received a very different answer on
their list (not that there's anything wrong with using existing tools,
especially when they're probably more efficient!).

For example - http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~gmh/pearl.pdf

Assuming it's not that common, any hand-waving reasons why?  More
pragmatic?  Efficient?  Imperative?

Not trying to start a war - genuinely curious how different lnguages
encourage different approaches (I checked help desk and found nothing).

Andrew


Danny Yoo wrote:
> Here's a quick-and-dirty parser for variables, ANDs, and ORs, using the
> parser-tools collection:
>
> ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
> (module logic mzscheme
>
> (provide (all-defined))
> (require (lib "lex.ss" "parser-tools"))
> (require (prefix : (lib "lex-sre.ss" "parser-tools")))
> (require (lib "yacc.ss" "parser-tools"))