[antlr-interest] Can subrules be set to 'n-to-m'?

[Jamie Ferguson]

Presumably you'd get 'exactly n times' from (...)[n,n] or (...)+[n,n].



On Fri, 2005-03-25 at 22:30 +0100, Martin Probst wrote:

> Am Freitag, den 25.03.2005, 09:13 -0800 schrieb John D. Mitchell:
> 
> > > (...)[n,m]
> > 
> > Yes, I agree that it use the square brackets (ala math notation):
> > 
> > (...)+[n,m]
> > 
> > with the ,m part optional.
> 
> Uh, better make only the "m" optional, e.g.
> > (...)+[n,]
> Otherwise it might be mistaken as "exactly n times". Maybe this should
> indeed be the case for (...)+[n]. Also (...)[1,] looks at least
> understandable for me - maybe as an alias for (...)+.
> 
> Regards,
> Martin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.antlr.org/pipermail/antlr-interest/attachments/20050325/58301ff4/attachment.html