[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] Re: named references

From: Alex Rozenman
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: named references
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 22:12:42 +0200


Joel E. Denny <address@hidden> wrote:

> So there are 2 categories of submessages: "refers to" or "possibly meant".
> Anything in "refers to" is the correct interpretation of a reference.
> Anything in "possibly meant" is an incorrect interpretation: bad
> bracketing, hidden/renamed, or out of scope in the case of mid-rules.
> Bracketing and symbol number are always shown in a submessage as above.
> If the type of incorrect interpretation is not bad bracketing, a word is
> added to indicate the type (like "hidden" in above example).
> There are 3 categories of errors:
> 1. "undefined reference": There are no "refers to" submessages, but there
> may be some "possibly meant" submessages.
> 2. "ambiguous reference": There is more than one "refers to" submessage,
> and there may be some "possibly meant" submessages.
> 3. "misleading reference": There is exactly one "refers to" submessage,
> and there is at least one "possibly meant" submessage.
Very good clarification. I agree.

On Wed, 18 Mar 2009, Akim Demaille wrote:

> The first one, and to my eyes by far the most important (even though it's
> just
> a matter of taste and the second point is actually more pragmatic), it goes
> against years of training in shell, Perl etc.  I conjecture that the eyes
> of
> most programmers (at least those from the Unix world) give a higher
> precedence
> to $ than to ".".
> And second, this is more robust to changes.  $stmt.list means $[stmt].list,
> whatever the context, while with your implementation, depending on the
> rule,
> it may change, depending on the names introduced.  Worse yet, a single
> action
> might see it's meaning change because of changes in the rule itself.
The second point is good. It could seem better to check all the declared
symbols but it will be ridiculous when adding a new symbol will raise errors
in many various unrelated places.

I will try to integrate all the proposals from this thread. Thank you.

Best regards,
Alex Rozenman (address@hidden).

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]