That's a good point. Are lexical non-DFA grammars allowed? It would be trivial to solve that with a regular expression lookahead. Although I suppose at that point you might as well call it a cover grammar.
Joe On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> wrote: > joe wrote: > >> By the way, I don't remember having grammar issues (I use a LALR >> compiler-compiler). Looking at my code, it looked like I handled it in the >> tokenizer stage; I added a COND_DOT token: >> >> COND_DOT : \?\. >> > > Did you keep backward compatibility? `x?.1:y` must continue to work. > > /be > No, it looks like I didn't.
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
