On Sun, Jul 03, 2005 at 11:08:56AM -0400, Will Coleda wrote:
> When I was compiling the rules, they weren't going where I thought
> they were going. This was because I stole code from compilers/pge/
> demo.pir improperly; there is a gname variable in there that's a PMC.
No, it's a string:
When I was compiling the rules, they weren't going where I thought
they were going. This was because I stole code from compilers/pge/
demo.pir improperly; there is a gname variable in there that's a PMC.
If you change it to a string instead, it seems to work fine.
Apparently as a PMC it was
On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 11:46:55PM -0400, Allison Randal wrote:
> On Jun 25, 2005, at 20:38, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
>
> >I've just checked in changes to PGE that enable it to support
> >grammars, as well as some more built-in rules...
>
> These are totally awesome. On the plane today, I conver
On Jun 25, 2005, at 20:38, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
I've just checked in changes to PGE that enable it to support
grammars, as well as some more built-in rules...
These are totally awesome. On the plane today, I converted the Punie
parser over to use the shiny new grammars. My one frustratio
I've just checked in changes to PGE that enable it to support
grammars, as well as some more built-in rules (,
, , , etc.). To create a new grammar,
just create a subclass of "PGE::Rule" and install new rules into
the new grammar's namespace:
.sub main @MAIN
load_bytecode "PGE.pbc"
