[antlr-interest] still more => wars ;)

[Chris Black]

Terence Parr wrote:

> Ok, so I not overjoyed with what you guys propose either ;)  Adding  
> random new symbols is probably not the answer. :)
>
> How about the following which is identical to what ANTLR v2 does.  To  
> get hoisted preds though you'll need the '=>' not '?'.
>
> (...) =>     syntactic predicate
> {...} =>    _hoisting_ disambiguating semantic predicate
> {...}?        gated semantic predicate

Would (...)? syntax still mean the same thing it does in ANTLR 2.7.x? If 
so, I'm cool with the above proposed syntax, although I'd prefer {...} 
?=> for gated semantic predicate. That way "=>" always means a predicate 
of some sort.

Chris