A lot of you have wondered why I'd don't use enum types for token types in the
generated Java-based parsers:
enum TokenType { ID(3), INT(4) };
I gave it my best shot but once again I found that enums just don't seem to
work for me. For example, without inheritance how can I define the match method?
void match(TokenType t) {....}
Unfortunately this is in the superclass not the generated class so TokenType is
not yet defined. Without inheritance, I have to use match(int). That means that
there's no point in using the enum.
But, you say, I should be using generics on the parser to pass in the token
type enum type. Fair enough, And I'll try once I tried to generic'ize the v3
runtime for v4. We've had some discussion of this on the dev list.
Ter
List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest
Unsubscribe:
http://www.antlr.org/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-inter...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
il-antlr-interest+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/il-antlr-interest?hl=en.
