The current VFR Grammar, as expressed in section 2.12 of the VFR specification,
does not seem to be viable. Take the following piece: 2.12.1:
[cid:[email protected]]
But imagine the following grammar:
5 OR 3 OR 2
This will go andTerm (returning 5) then "OR" but then it will have andTerm
again, so the 2nd "OR" will not ever be processed.
I believe that this should be:
andTerm ( "OR" vfrStatementExpression)
Likewise, each of the following sections (2.12.2 and following), seems to
suffer from the same issue.
Tim
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and
search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck
Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code
search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds
_______________________________________________
edk2-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/edk2-devel
