Greetings!
On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 17:04 +0200, Sébastien Kirche wrote:
> Le 7 juillet 2011 05:08, John B. Brodie <[email protected]> a écrit :
> > see attached.
>
> Many, many thanks, as your corrections on my example helped me
> considerably and the initial recursion is gone.
you are welcome. i actually enjoy doing this stuff.
> I had also an obvious bug in my "NOT" expression. Now I have added
> some other structures like for/next and choose/case
>
> My current problem is that your refactor of my funCall rule by
> following an expression by a postfix notation seems not working on my
> test code.
> That looks clever, but during parsing, the Parser seem to look for a
> missing assignment between the function identifier and the parameter
> list. I did not found why yet.
>
> I join my grammar in its current state.
change the singleStatement rule to this:
singleStatement
: IDENT ( OPEQ expression | '(' expressionList? ')' )
| 'return' expression
;
and delete the now unnecessary assignment rule.
-jbb
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 [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/il-antlr-interest?hl=en.
