At 13:45 13/08/2009, Tim Williams wrote:
>For the scopedClause rule below, I'm getting this error(132):
>"$scopedClause is ambiguous; rule scopedClause is enclosing rule
>and referenced in the production (assuming enclosing rule)"
[...]
>scopedClause:
> LPAREN (scopedClause->scopedClause) ((OR_TOKEN s2=scopedClause)
>->
>^(OR $scopedClause $s2))+ RPAREN
> | LPAREN (scopedClause->scopedClause) ((AND_TOKEN
>s2=scopedClause)
>-> ^(AND $scopedClause $s2))+ RPAREN
> | LPAREN (scopedClause->scopedClause) ((NOT_TOKEN
>s2=scopedClause)
>-> ^(NOT $scopedClause $s2))+ RPAREN
> | searchClause
> -> searchClause
> ;
I think the warning will go away if you explicitly label the first
path -- ie. replace all of your (scopedClause->scopedClause)
fragments with (s1=scopedClause->$s1). (Using $scopedClause in
the second rewrite is correct though, and should be left like
that.)
You could, however, improve performance by first left factoring
it:
scopedClause
: LPAREN (s1=scopedClause -> $s1)
( OR_TOKEN s2=scopedClause -> ^(OR $scopedClause $s2)
| AND_TOKEN s2=scopedClause -> ^(AND $scopedClause $s2)
| NOT_TOKEN s2=scopedClause -> ^(NOT $scopedClause $s2)
)+ RPAREN
| searchClause -> searchClause
;
(Although that begs the question: is NOT really a binary operator
in your language? And is 'LPAREN searchClause RPAREN' supposed to
be illegal? Because as it stands, both are the case.)
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
