Great. Thanks! Can we expect that in 3.2?
Oliver 2008/11/30 Terence Parr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I agree. '.' as root should be ok. I'll have to go back and make it context > sensitive. Right now, '.' can be a subtree as well. it would mess up > analysis. > Ter > On Nov 29, 2008, at 3:23 PM, Gavin Lambert wrote: > >> At 09:58 30/11/2008, Oliver Zeigermann wrote: >> >Hmmm. Just checked that with the latest snapshot of ANTLR 3.2, >> >but it really does not work, but it should, right? Why can "." >> >not be a tree root? >> >> Yes, that's what Sam Harwell and myself were discussing earlier in this >> thread; I think we agree that this should be considered as valid. >> >> (I gave a detailed description of how I think it should behave earlier on, >> but the general idea was to make ANTLR parse the tree as if it were a "real" >> tree rather than the "flat" tree that it's actually implemented as.) >> > > List: http://www.antlr.org:8080/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest Unsubscribe: http://www.antlr.org:8080/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 il-antlr-interest@googlegroups.com 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
