Benoit Fouletier wrote:
> I think special_string should be a lexer rule, not a parser rule: rename it
> to SPECIAL_STRING. Also, the lexer depends on the order with which you define
> tokens, so make sure you put ANTLRTOKEN above SPECIAL_STRING.
This will work, but it will generate ambiguity warnings (because "ANTLR"
can be lexed either as an ANTLRTOKEN or a SPECIAL_STRING). To eliminate
the warning and make the intent clear, put ANTLRTOKEN in a 'tokens' block,
i.e.:
grammar sample_parser;
options {
language=C;
}
tokens {
ANTLRTOKEN = 'ANTLR';
}
requestline : ANTLRTOKEN WHITESPACE special_string ;
SPECIAL_STRING : (CHAR | '=' | '.' | '-' | '@' )+ ;
WHITESPACE : ( '\t' | ' ' | '\u000C' )+;
NEWLINE: ('\r')? '\n';
fragment CHAR: (('a'..'z')|('A'..'Z'));
Note that it is necessary to change CHAR to a fragment rule if
SPECIAL_STRING is a lexer rule (which I agree it probably should be).
--
David-Sarah Hopwood ⚥ http://davidsarah.livejournal.com
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
