[antlr-interest] Failure on OpenJDK on Debian
Gavin Lambert
antlr at mirality.co.nz
Wed Apr 1 05:37:01 PDT 2009
At 00:02 2/04/2009, Sam Barnett-Cormack wrote:
>However, k=*, it'll do whatever lookahead is needed, so there
>isn't actually an ambiguity with LL(*). It would be silly to
>left-factor, say:
>
>EVERY : 'every';
>EACH : 'each';
>EVENT : 'event';
>
>Because it just makes it unreadable. ANTLR knows what to do with
>this, so why left-factor? You'll end up with equivalent decision
>making, even.
Right, which is why those aren't the problem -- they can always be
resolved with static lookahead, so they shouldn't take long to
figure out.
Where you can get into trouble is when there's a common left
prefix involving a loop -- such as the INT vs FLOAT vs RANGE case.
More information about the antlr-interest
mailing list