> Actually I don't think you can define a grammar where two operators have
> the same precedence but different associativity. Be it a pure BNF
> grammar, or a classical yacc specification (using the %left and %right
> declarations).
But that would mean only perl6 could pass perl6, which isn't much different
from the perl5 situation, is it?
[Yes, I'm twisting things somewhat. the perl5 parser, written in C, can parse
perl5]
Although my brain thinks that having expressions with both <~ and ~> should
be illegal, because it's too damn confusing. Roughly:
<~ ... ~> # My brain leaking out of my ears
~> ... <~ # My brain collapses because it's under too much pressure.
Nicholas Clark
