[antlr-interest] MismatchedTokenException and how to find errors in ANTLRWorks

[Jim Idle]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Loring Craymer [mailto:lgcraymer at yahoo.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 12:17 PM
> To: antlr-interest at antlr.org
> Subject: Re: [antlr-interest] MismatchedTokenException and how to find
> errors in ANTLRWorks
> 
> I've learned that "the customer is always right" is good policy on bug
> reports--not that he is right about the specifics, but that he is
> usually right that "there is a problem". 

I dont think that anyone has said anything different to this, 
including myself. However, what I think is wrong is that they are there 
in the first place. Others think they are a good idea, however I don't 
see any good way to explain it to new users when all they want to do is 
start hacking away (as we all do, with everything).

> As Guntis points out, in this
> case it is not the literals that are the problem but the confusion
> arising from combined grammars which hide the lexer. 

> Jim's
> approach of discouraging beginners from using them has to be 
incorrect;
> literals are not an advanced feature but a user convenience if they 
are
> properly documented.

If you think that all that is wrong is they are not documented properly, 
then there is an easy solution that you can provide, being to document 
them. Personally, I think that new users wont read that documentation 
either at all or at least properly and will be in exactly the same 
situation. If I had a vote, I would vote to remove them altogether. I 
never said that they were an advanced feature, but that the issues are 
too confusing for new users hence only users with a bit more knowledge 
of how it flows together can use them without confusing their selves.

In the absence of any other options, the 'approach' to suggest not using 
them has helped quite a few people, and as such I must disagree that it 
is somehow wrong. 

Jim