[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 ;)

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