On Friday, January 31, 2014 at 5:42 AM, Dmitry Gutov wrote:
On 30.01.2014 16:35, Stefan Monnier wrote:Warning (smie): Conflict: . </= .Warning (smie): Conflict: . </= .The smie-precs->prec2 part of your grammar says that "." = "." (becauseof the new (assoc ".") you add there).But the BNF part of your grammar says "." < "." (i.e. "foo . bar . baz"is parsed as "foo . (bar . baz)" because of (id "." exp).Fantastic, thanks for the explanation. With (assoc ".") changed to(right "."), the warning is gone.I've also fixed the precedence of "." vs "? :" and modified a test caserespectively. See the new patch attached.Do you think it's not too late in the feature freeze to install a changelike this, or should we wait until the trunk reopens?We have a decent number of test cases, so it's not like the patch islikely to introduce major breakage.Apparently there is no more conflict in the BNF in this respect so thedisambiguation constraint (assoc ".") that's passed to it is ignored.Without that constraint there, SMIE showed warnings about ambiguitiesbetween ".", "," and "=". It somehow ignored the associativity, though.The warnings with the previous patch also were gone when only the secondone (assoc ".") were changed to (right "."). The first one, in the BNFdisambiguation part, could be either.Bozhidar, would you care to test the new patch?
Attachments:- ruby-chained-calls.diff