> Still, we could easily do it with a simple {...}? so ANTLR can still do it
> without formalism,
> just as PEGs force you to manually say that as well. :)
Are you thinking of a validating semantic predicate after matching the keyword?
Not sure if that would work always, could that not give rise to a failed
predicate error message when we really just want the parser to use the
identifier rule instead? Or are you thinking of a semantic predicate checking
look-ahead for keyword followed by not-letter not-digit?
Peter
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.
