> It's not clear from your question if only method calls are legal within a > "with" statement, in which case the suggestions made should work, or if (as > I suspect) any statement is legal within a "with", like in javascript.
Thanks for the replies, everyone. You're correct, Peter, it is not limited to only method calls. I don't think parameter passing will work, since the enclosed statement block is not part of the withStatement rule. I (over-?) simplified my example grammar fragment as an illustration; withStatement and the stuff inside the With block are all "statements" in higher rules, so I'd need to pass parameters among large numbers of rules, which is doesn't seem very maintainable. Isn't this exactly what a scope was intended for? Assuming this is an appropriate place to use a scope, how do I get that withStatement ID value into a scope instead of into a parameter? Thanks again! 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.
