Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from July 2009
2009/7/20 Vincent Pit <perl@profvince.com>: > >> This is extremely neat. >> However by looking at the perly.y part of the patch (I haven't looked >> at the other ones yet) I see that you add switch as a derivation for >> the term rule, but switch can begin with a label. And terms don't. >> >> I'd rather have a new rule >> switch : label given; >> and add given to term. >> > > The problem in this approach is that it makes bison complain about some > reduce/reduce conflicts. I'm unsure if those are genuine or not. I think they are. Without looking at the code: I think bison doesn't know whether he should reduce as a given-expression, or as a given-statement. And without infinite lookahead that's not going to work. If we remove given-statement, that will mandate a semicolon at the end of a given block, as for any expression. That's not nice either. Basically that construct is too ambiguous now...Thread Previous | Thread Next