On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 6:21 PM, Jim Idle <[email protected]> wrote:
> It's not completely flawed. To do what you asked, you do not need to > influence the lexer, just look ahead in the off-channel at certain points > and change the channel of the SEMI back to the default if you wanted it to > appear; but as I said, that is an awkward way to do it I think. > > Jim > > My ideas was more or less that whenever I have ambigous syntax (with no semicolons whatsoever in the parser) I resolve problems using syntactic predicates taking "optional" parts of syntax (like semicolons) into consideration. If syntactic predicate hit the optional part then it would fail - meaning that separator divided potentially ambigous construct and it is time to try the next alternative. It seemed clean to me, but you've made me think about it again. I could use your suggestion to make semicolon tokens reappear but how do I do this? CommonTokenStream does not seem to provide any public method of inspecting non-default channels -- 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.
