Author: autrijus
Date: Thu Apr 20 23:49:15 2006
New Revision: 8893
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S05.pod
Log:
Stylistic cleanup of S05; no functional changes.
* s/TimToady/Larry Wall/
* Consistently change "foo" to C or I to be consistent
with context.
* Fixed the "state $x ||= /.../" ex
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schreef:
> @@ -266,7 +266,7 @@
>
> =item *
>
> -The new C<:rw> modifier causes this rule to "claim" the current
> +The new C<:rw> modifier causes this regex to "claim" the current
> string for modification rather than assuming copy-on-write semantics.
There are about eight use
Author: larry
Date: Thu Apr 20 17:01:01 2006
New Revision: 8891
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S05.pod
Log:
As per Damian++'s suggestion, regex is now base form and rule is specialized.
(Note: subrules are still called subrules, not subregexes.)
The .matches method has been unified with multid
Larry wrote:
> : I agree with Audrey that C is probably too useful in other
> : contexts. C works fine for me.
>
> Aesthetically, I hate :w, actually...and the whole point of naming "token"
> is that it is *not* a normal parser rule, but a lexer rule.
>
> But I agree that "parse" is probably the
Author: pmichaud
Date: Thu Apr 20 11:48:29 2006
New Revision: 8886
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S12.pod
Log:
* Fixed "long dot" constructs to reflect new syntax.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S12.pod
==
--- doc/tr
Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> Two other ideas (from a short walk)... how about something along
> the lines of "phrase" or "sequence"?
Parsec use the word "lexeme" to mean exactly the same thing...
Audrey
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 09:19:48AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> : > +Any other value causes the match to fail. In particular, shorter keys
> : > +are not tried if a longer one matches and fails.
> :
> : Is there a way to say to continue with the next shortest key?
>
> Yeah, use <@rules> rather tha
On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 09:24:09AM -0500, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
: First, let me say I really like the changes to S05. Good work
: once again.
:
: Here are my questions and comments.
:
: On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 02:07:51AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: > -(To get rule interpolation use an
On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 09:24:09AM -0500, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> First, let me say I really like the changes to S05. Good work
> once again.
>
> Here are my questions and comments.
>
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 02:07:51AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > -(To get rule interpolation use an
First, let me say I really like the changes to S05. Good work
once again.
Here are my questions and comments.
On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 02:07:51AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> -(To get rule interpolation use an assertion - see below)
> +However, if C<$var> contains a rule object, rather attem
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> +=item *
> +
> +Just as C has variants, so does the C declarator.
> +In particular, there are two special variants for use in grammars:
> +C and C.
After a brief discussion on #perl6 with pmichaud and Juerd, it seems
that a verb "parse" at the same space as "sub"/"method
> +but rather easier to read. The bare C<*>, C<+> and C quantifiers
> +never backtrack in a C unless some outer rule has specified a
> +C<:panic> option that applies. If you want to prevent even that, use
> +C<*:>, C<+:> or C to prevent any backtracking into the quantifier.
> +If you want to expl
Author: larry
Date: Thu Apr 20 02:07:51 2006
New Revision: 8883
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S05.pod
Log:
Various clarifications.
Documented that null first alternative is ignored.
Removed colon separator after last modifier, now just use space.
Deleted the :once modifier. (A state variable
13 matches
Mail list logo
