Indeed! Even documented, this seems like way too many reduce/reduce conflicts---we should be able to refactor the grammar to avoid them.
On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 3:59:48 AM Simon Marlow <marlo...@gmail.com> wrote: > reduce/reduce conflicts are bad, especially so since they're > undocumented. We don't know whether this introduced parser bugs or not. > Mike - could you look at this please? It was your commit that > introduced the new conflicts. > > Cheers, > Simon > > On 02/12/2014 10:19, Dr. ERDI Gergo wrote: > > On Mon, 1 Dec 2014, Richard Eisenberg wrote: > > > >> In unrelated work, I saw this scroll across when happy'ing the parser: > >> > >>> shift/reduce conflicts: 60 > >>> reduce/reduce conflicts: 16 > >> > >> These numbers seem quite a bit higher than what I last remember (which > >> is something like 48 and 1, not 60 and 16). Does anyone know why? > > > > The offending commit is bc2289e13d9586be087bd8136943dc35a0130c88. I know > > this because I was changing the parser for patsyn signatures, and so I > > updated the numbers in Parser.y to make sure I'm not adding any new > > conflicts: > > > > 25 June 2014 > > > > Conflicts: 47 shift/reduce > > 1 reduce/reduce > > > > > > but then when time came to rebase my changes before pushing, I noticed > > that it has gone up, and I had to update it yet again in Parser.y: > > > > 20 Nov 2014 > > > > Conflicts: 60 shift/reduce > > 12 reduce/reduce > > > > So anyway, the point is, if you try bc2289e and bc2289e^ you can see > > that that is the commit that introduced these new conflicts. > > _______________________________________________ > > ghc-devs mailing list > > ghc-devs@haskell.org > > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > ghc-devs@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs >
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs