At 08:35 11/02/2010, Michael Siff wrote:
> NESTED : '/*' (NESTED | .)* '*/' { $channel = HIDDEN } ;
>
>However, the language in question has the need to consider
tokens
>like:
>
> /*:bool:*/
>
>as a way of specifying explicit type information. Currently,
what I
>have gets the nested comments correctly, but then ignores the
>/*:bool:*/ as if it is a comment even though I have a separate
>rule like:
>
> BOOL : '/*:bool:*/' ;
>
>Is there an easy way around this problem?
First, ensure your BOOL rule is listed before your NESTED
rule. In case of doubt, ANTLR will give preference to the first
listed rule, so this may be enough by itself to get the behaviour
you want.
Failing that, usually the solution to this sort of thing is to be
a bit more explicit about what you're expecting a comment to look
like; for example, if you want to treat anything of the form
/*:xxxx:*/ as a processing instruction rather than a comment, you
can do this:
fragment PROC_INSTR: '/*:...:*/';
fragment NESTED: '/*' (NESTED | .)* '*/';
COMMENT: '/*' ( (':') => ':' .* ':*/' { $type = PROC_INSTR; }
| (NESTED | .)* '*/'
;
(Some refinement may be needed to handle error cases such as
/*:foo*/.)
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.
