The conflicts are to be expected. The parser generator resolves shift/reduce conflicts in favor of shift.
Nate On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 17:35, Jeeva Paudel <je...@ualberta.ca> wrote: > Hi all, > > I see that the parser generator reports several identifier/keyword > reduce/shift and reduce/reduce conflicts when using the x10.g grammar > specification from the trunk (2.0.5). Should I be worrying about these > conflicts before moving on to make changes to the grammar? If not, is it > enough to ensure that a modified parser runs successfully over the existing > test cases and meets the new requirements? > > Thanks for your help. > Jeeva > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Sell apps to millions through the Intel(R) Atom(Tm) Developer Program > Be part of this innovative community and reach millions of netbook users > worldwide. Take advantage of special opportunities to increase revenue and > speed time-to-market. Join now, and jumpstart your future. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-atom-d2d > _______________________________________________ > X10-users mailing list > X10-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/x10-users > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sell apps to millions through the Intel(R) Atom(Tm) Developer Program Be part of this innovative community and reach millions of netbook users worldwide. Take advantage of special opportunities to increase revenue and speed time-to-market. Join now, and jumpstart your future. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-atom-d2d _______________________________________________ X10-users mailing list X10-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/x10-users
