On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 06:07:54PM +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
> >Including :skip(/<someotherrule>/). Yes, agreed, it's a huge 
> >improvement. I'd be more comfortable if the default rule to 
> >use for skipping was named <skip> instead of <ws>. 
> >(On IRC <sep> was also proposed, but the connection between
> >:skip and <skip> is more immediately obvious.)
> Yes, I like <skip> too. I too keep mistakely reading <ws> as "WhiteSpace".

FWIW, I recently noticed noticed in another language
definition the phrase "intertoken space" as being something
that can occur on either side of any token, but not within
a token.  Perhaps some abbreviation or variation of that could 
work in place of either "ws" or "skip".

(Somehow "skip" seems too verbish to me, when the other
subrules we tend to see in a rule tend to be nounish.  Yes, I 
know that "skip" can be a noun as well, it just feels wrong.)

> I'm still utterly convinced my original three-keyword list is the right one 
> (and that the three keywords in it are the right ones too). 

Having played with regex/token/rule in the perl6 grammar a bit
further, as well as looking at a couple of others, I'm finding 
regex/token/rule to be fairly natural.  It only becomes unnatural
if I'm trying hard to optimize things -- e.g., by using "token" instead
of "rule" to avoid unnecessary calls to <?ws>.  (And it may well turn
out that trying to avoid these calls is a premature or incorrect
optimization anyway -- I won't know until I'm a little farther along
in the grammars I'm work with.)


Reply via email to