David E Jones wrote: > > IFF you can find a fix in the Java code. Because of the way UEL > interprets things I don't think that will be possible. > > Like I explained IGNORING the error doesn't make it go away, it just > causes a bigger problem by hiding the problem. If there is a general way > to actually handle this, ie fix the problems and not just ignore the > errors, then let's do it by all means. > > However, with UEL we're introducing new syntax rules and things like > this are likely to come up. In this case, there is NO way for the parser > to know that the "-" is part of the ID and not an arithmetic operator > without using a different syntax, as is done in this commit. Well, if we > could tell the parser "no arithmetic" for these sorts of expressions > then we might be able to fix it in Java, but otherwise based on my > experience with parsers and general parsing concepts, then there's no > way to avoid these kinds of changes.
Like what happens when other characters are used, '*', '/', or, even, a '.' or ' '.
