[antlr-interest] Can subrules be set to 'n-to-m'?
sk at z.pl
Tue Mar 29 08:30:45 PST 2005
+1 for optional parens...
On Saturday 26 March 2005 20:55, Scott Stanchfield wrote:
> What is the problem here??? Why do you insist on making me waste
> keystrokes and make the grammar LESS clear?
> Expressions have been written this way for 30 or more years in the
> computer field, and well longer than that in mathematics.
> Based on the experience I've had introducing people to ANTLR, yes. They
> ALL ask about why the parens are needed.
> Think about how many people use regular expressions.
> Rather than
> Why insist on redefining common usage of + and *???
I'm with Scott here... Too much parens obfuscate the .g code for me.
Hey, it's ANTLR, not Lisp, after all.
More information about the antlr-interest