[antlr-interest] Re: A couple of questions regarding literals and unicode
Terence Parr
parrt at jguru.com
Sat Dec 7 10:33:09 PST 2002
On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 02:18 PM, davidjpenton2002 wrote:
> Duh...now I feel silly. That seems pretty obvious.
Not so obvious ;)
> I misunderstood what I saw in other sample grammars. In grammars I
> looked at to teach myself antlr, I saw that there was no *exact*
> lexical rule corresponding to a parser literal in many cases. But I
> suppose that in such cases the *whole point* is that another (more
> general) lexer rule matches the literal, thereby necessitating an
> option to cause a check against the literal table. Is that it?
Yep...happens by default in auto generated nextToken if you don't
specify a rule to do it.
>
> I guess I'll ask if I can get my ditch-digging job back, or else maybe
> I just need more sleep :-)
Sometimes I wish I were putting on roofs for a living still. But then
I remember how hot it is on a roof in the summer so I wish I were
loading boxcars again. But then I remember how tired I got so I figure
I'll just stick with the computer gig ;)
Ter
--
Co-founder, http://www.jguru.com
Creator, ANTLR Parser Generator: http://www.antlr.org
Lecturer in Comp. Sci., University of San Francisco
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
More information about the antlr-interest
mailing list