On 7/6/20 06:36, Akim Demaille wrote:
I don't think you ever posted a snippet of that grammar of yours. I
suppose there are IP issues, but maybe you could share just a small
bit, or a fake example, so that we can have a better idea of it?
I did send you one years ago, but here goes again. You
> On Jul 4, 2020, at 6:46 AM, Christian Schoenebeck
> wrote:
> The only thing that people are missing once in a while on scanner side is
> unicode support
I am missing the capability to support grammars with optional spaces between
elements. In BASIC:
FORI=1TO5
is equivalent to:
FOR I
On Montag, 6. Juli 2020 14:00:17 CEST Maury Markowitz wrote:
> > On Jul 4, 2020, at 6:46 AM, Christian Schoenebeck
> > wrote: The only thing that people are missing
> > once in a while on scanner side is unicode support
>
> I am missing the capability to support grammars with optional spaces betw
This is elegant to me. I think it can be put to work, but am not sure.
for_construct :
TOKEN_FOR optional_whitespace
identifier TOKEN_EQ number optional_whitespace
TOKEN_TO optional_whitespace
number
{
/* nodes with values at indexes $3, $5, $9 */
}
> On
> Le 6 juil. 2020 à 14:00, Maury Markowitz a écrit :
>
>> On Jul 4, 2020, at 6:46 AM, Christian Schoenebeck
>> wrote:
>> The only thing that people are missing once in a while on scanner side is
>> unicode support
>
> I am missing the capability to support grammars with optional spaces bet
Moving to a new thread - I was surprised I could even post, previous efforts
were bounced from the list server for no obvious reason. Someone helpfully
posted for me in the past. And now everything is magically working, so I hope
you don't all mind the duplicate.
> On Jul 6, 2020, at 9:04 AM, C
On Montag, 6. Juli 2020 18:25:56 CEST Maury Markowitz wrote:
> Moving to a new thread - I was surprised I could even post, previous efforts
> were bounced from the list server for no obvious reason. Someone helpfully
> posted for me in the past. And now everything is magically working, so I
> hope
Hi Maury,
> Le 6 juil. 2020 à 18:25, Maury Markowitz a écrit :
>
> Moving to a new thread - I was surprised I could even post, previous efforts
> were bounced from the list server for no obvious reason.
That's really weird.
>> On Jul 6, 2020, at 9:04 AM, Christian Schoenebeck
>> wrote:
>>
> On Jul 6, 2020, at 1:30 PM, Christian Schoenebeck
> wrote:
> Which would resolve that ambiguity of your example, if it actually exists, as
> I have never seen "FOREX" as valid BASIC loop definition before, if there is,
> sources for that specification appreciated.
BASIC Computer Games, Super S
> On Jul 6, 2020, at 3:23 PM, Akim Demaille wrote:
>
> FOR/{sp}{id}{sp}={sp}{num}{sp}TO{sp}{num} { printf("for: %s\n", yytext); }
This is a very different style than what I have seen in the past. In the past,
most examples of flex tend to match against the tokens as individual items and
retur
On Montag, 6. Juli 2020 21:48:19 CEST Maury Markowitz wrote:
> > On Jul 6, 2020, at 1:30 PM, Christian Schoenebeck
> > wrote: Which would resolve that ambiguity of
> > your example, if it actually exists, as I have never seen "FOREX" as
> > valid BASIC loop definition before, if there is, sources
I remember many years ago reading through the IBM 360 (Mainframe)
assembler code for the Fortran 66 H compiler to understand how the
Hollerith constants were parsed.
I suspect finding an "H" after an integer (and skipping that many
following characters) might be problematic for today's scanners.
T
> Le 6 juil. 2020 à 22:01, Maury Markowitz a écrit :
>
>> On Jul 6, 2020, at 3:23 PM, Akim Demaille wrote:
>>
>> FOR/{sp}{id}{sp}={sp}{num}{sp}TO{sp}{num} { printf("for: %s\n", yytext); }
>
> This is a very different style than what I have seen in the past. In the
> past, most examples of
13 matches
Mail list logo
