Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> writes: > On 9/13/19 10:39 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: > >>>> + expression A; expression A, ... likewise, but separated by , >>> >>> worth calling out that trailing , are not allowed? >> >> Doesn't "separated by" imply that? >> >>> Is the 'expression A;' a copy-paste from RFC text, irrelevant to our >>> usage here? >> >> What about >> >> * Repetition: Expression A... matches zero or more occurences of >> expression A >> * Repetition: Expression A, ... matches zero or more occurences of >> expression A separated by , > > With the spelling of 'occurrences' fixed, that works.
Repeat offender... Will fix, thanks! [...]
