[a-zA-Z0-9_]+ is a quantified rule RHS and it just needs its own LHS as you did above with identifier_extend, otherwise it is a SLIF DSL syntax error.
As the doc says: The right side declaration of a rule will often contain one or more RHS > alternatives. A RHS alternative is a series of RHS primaries, where a RHS > primary may be a symbol name, a character class, or a single-quoted string. https://metacpan.org/pod/distribution/Marpa-R2/pod/Scanless/DSL.pod#RHS-alternatives Note that RHS primary can't be a quantified character class -- there are quantified rules for that -- https://metacpan.org/pod/distribution/Marpa-R2/pod/Scanless/DSL.pod#Quantified-rule On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 11:07 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > I am new to Marpa and I hope I can ask some newbie questions here. > > I very often get the error "No lexeme found" and I would like to > understand it. > > The following grammar part works fine: > > limited_identifier ~ [a-zA-Z_] identifier_extend > identifier_extend ~ [a-zA-Z0-9_]+ > > > But this one throws the error: > > limited_identifier ~ [a-zA-Z_] [a-zA-Z0-9_]+ > > > For me there is no difference. But there seems to be a difference for > Marpa. > > What is the difference? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "marpa parser" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "marpa parser" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
