[antlr-interest] Help Needed with multiple alternatives

[shmuel siegel]

Jim Idle wrote:
> ...
>
>  
>
> In your grammar, the operators it is complaining of can associate with 
> the expr that ends the let expr, which is probably what you are 
> expecting, or the expr that contains the let as an expr. Your grammar 
> allows let to be the expr that is part of a let, so you can have let x 
> in let y in let b in g ->yyyy  etc . SO, which let clause did you mean 
> it to belong to? That is what ANTLR is telling you.
>
>  
>
> Jim
>
>  
>
Jim,
I congratulate you on being able to construct a concrete case that 
exhibits the ambiguity. I couldn't do it. Could ANTLR be modified to 
output such concrete examples?