Quoting Trans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > That's a good point. But we should be clear. First, this is only > ambiguious for constants. Moreover, the above is equivalent to > redefining the value of the constant. I.e. > > SomeConstant = Class.new(some_expression) > > So it would not matter anyway --in other words, using a > superclass is pointless when reopening a pre-existent class, so > this statement must be defining a class called SomeConstant. > There's really no ambiguity.
Only because you have an a priori idea of what makes sense. It's easy to insist that a parser should "do what you mean", but try explaining that to a pushdown automaton... Try writing some BNF for this part of Ruby's syntax, with your proposed change. Then you'll understand. -mental _______________________________________________ Rubygrammar-grammarians mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygrammar-grammarians
