From: Mikael Brockman <mikael@...>
Date: 2004-10-13T00:03:41+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby Directions (was Re: quality of error messages)

Markus <markus@reality.com> writes:

> On Tue, 2004-10-12 at 01:37, Randy W. Sims wrote:
> > Markus wrote:
> > >>PS: I still like the other idea (end [(module|class|def) [<NAME>]]) 
> > >>better. =)
> > > 
> > > 
> > >      I have not been able to assure myself that this could be done
> > > without breaking anything (or at least, be done by me).  I can see how
> > > to do it, but I am just rusty enough on the guts of LR(1)/LALR(1)
> > > parsers to be uneasy with the potential for conflicts.
> > > 
> > >      Would you like me to pursue the idea?  (With the caveat that my
> > > experiments are for our enlightenment, and not meant to be
> > > shaping/forcing ruby's development in any way that it does not wish to
> > > go.)
> > 
> > Yeah. I'm toying around, taking a brief look at parse.y. I know a lot of 
> > the theory of lexing/parsing. I've hand crafted small itsy-bitsy toy 
> > lexer/parsers. But I'm mostly ignorant of what I'm looking at here.
> > 
> > I was thinking, focusing soley on class defs for the moment, that at the 
> > start of a class definition it should be possible to store the class 
> > name (cname?). Then at the close accept a optional 'class' keyword 
> > following end, and then an optional identifier which must match the 
> > stored cname. But I have no idea how to implement that at the moment.
> > 
> > I guess I should be reading the bison manual...
> 
>      I realized in my sleep (yes, I literally do program in my sleep)

...