Five more minutes' thought, and I'm no longer sure. =;^) There are other kinds of semantic predicates that can be used for disabling alternatives. Is it really by design that a validating semantic predicate does not validate when filter=true?
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 5:59 AM, Tom Smith<[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 5:51 AM, Gavin Lambert<[email protected]> wrote: >> I've never really played with filter=true in tree grammars, but when used in >> lexers the whole point is to only define the rules you care about and >> anything that doesn't successfully match a rule is ignored. >> >> Thus if the predicate fails, it's not an error -- it's simply not a match >> for that rule, and the parser will go try another alternative, or give up >> and skip it. >> >> So I'm not surprised that the exception isn't being produced. >> > > Gavin: > > Presented this way, your reasoning makes sense to me. Thanks for > taking the time to respond. > > Tom. > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
