I think that the problem is you are trying to use the gated predicate to
continue consuming. Instead just use action code and then the gated predicate
will just select the rule. Here is a working example:
grammar T;
aaa : rule+ EOF
;
rule
: classtok
| ident
;
classtok : CLASS;
ident : IDENTIFIER;
CLASS
:
'class'
;
IDENTIFIER
:
{Character.isJavaIdentifierStart(input.LA(1))}?=> . { while
(Character.isJavaIdentifierPart(input.LA(1))) { input.consume(); } }
;
WS : (' '|'\t'|'\n'|'\r')+ { skip(); } ;
As previously stated, your rule here will cause the lexer to just barf on a
character that is invalid. So if you construct the set of characters that
cannot be anything else in your token set and use that in your while loop then
you will be able to check the INDETIFER you pick up and validate it, resulting
in a much nicer error message. If you can rely on the input being good, then
you perhaps don't need to worry about that.
Jim
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marcin Rzeznicki [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 10:45 AM
> To: Jim Idle
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [antlr-interest] MismatchedTokenException
>
> 2009/12/14 Marcin Rzeźnicki <[email protected]>:
> > 2009/12/13 Jim Idle <[email protected]>:
> >> This usually means that your lexer token numbers are out of sync
> with your
> >> parser tokens. Regen in correct order and make sure all tokens have
> been
> >> declared.
> >>
> >
> > Umm, what if I work with combined grammar? And some of literals are
> 'inlined'?
> >
>
> I think I know what has been causing this problem but I am scratching
> my head. It seems that ANTLR lexer is, well, a strange beast.
> I have a rule, say
> CLASS
> :
> 'class'
> ;
>
> and below
>
> IDENTIFIER
> :
> {Character.isJavaIdentifierStart(input.LA(1))}?=> . (
> {Character.isJavaIdentifierPart(input.LA(1))}?=> . )*
> ;
>
> (the latter rule has been questioned here, but bear with me a while, I
> need it to explain my case)
>
> Now, upon seeing input 'class' ANTLR matches IDENTIFIER because of
> this gating predicate. Well, 'class' would have been a valid
> identifier, of course but shouldn't it try to match 'class' based on
> rules precedence?
> --
> Greetings
> Marcin Rzeźnicki
List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest
Unsubscribe:
http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"il-antlr-interest" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/il-antlr-interest?hl=en.
