Ary Borenszweig wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Rainer Deyke wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Now there are several problems with this. All of the following compile:
Possible solution: treat all sequences as dots as part of the same
token, always.
0.....wyda
0....wyda
0.... wyda
0... .wyda
0.. .wyda
0. ....wyda
All rejected by the lexer.
No. Actually, some, yes :o).
I think he meant those /could/ be made to be rejected by the lexer.
Hack the lexer to support a useless and dangerous feature? Now we got
something going.
At
least rejecting more than three consecutive dots leaves you with:
0... .wyda
0.. .wyda
which are ok. Also "0." and the like should be rejected.
Yup, more gratuitous changes to the language. We are left with "the
little space that could change everything".
0. .. .wyda
0. ...wyda
Legal and unambiguous.
And throroughly confusing, which was my point.
The ".name" syntax and the "number." are the things that are confusing,
not the inclusive/exclusive ranges.
The .name syntax and the number. syntax are confusing. Using "..." as a
separator multiplies confusion by a billion.
Andrei
