> Note that {ws} + '.' + '=' is exactly the converse of {id}, so there
> is nothing else to match.The specified abbreviations refer only partly to a converse (not exactly!). Two characters are different in the relevant pattern. > It's weird that SINGLE_CHARACTER is taking a char* instead of a char > (i.e., I expect to see '*yytext', not 'yytext' there). Thanks for your tip. The flex message "lexer.l:36: warning, rule cannot be matched" remains. >> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2224373/scannerless-parser-generators > > Scannerless is a fine idea, however I fear that with Bison > you'll get bad performances. Would you like to try out a design variant for scannerless parsing? I imagine that this design approach would need the possibility to connect a data type by other means than the statement "%token", wouldn't it? Regards, Markus _______________________________________________ help-bison@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-bison
