[antlr-interest] Re: "protected" lexer rules

[John D. Mitchell]

>>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Rolfs <thomas.rolfs at cox.net> writes:
>>>>>> Terence writes:
[...]

> How about "explicit", as in C++? Or some word that means the rule must be
> invoked or referenced from another rule.

Not!

That's worse than "protected". I.e., all of the meaning of "explicit" (in
this case) is *implicit*!  That's Unspeakable Evil(tm)!


Of the proposed names so far, besides "shorthand", "alias" is the only one
whose meaning has a direct bearing on the actual nature of that type of
helper rule.

Take care,
	John


 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/antlr-interest/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    antlr-interest-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/