You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Apr 3, 2023. It is now read-only.
Conjuctions don't work well because the parser confuses the word and with the syntax for tuples.
For instance, this works with or:
Applejack has more than one or Pinkie Pie has more than one
[1.60] parsed: Alternative(
List(
Relational(
VariableValue(applejack),>,NumberValue(1)
),
Relational(
VariableValue(pinkie pie),>,NumberValue(1)
)
)
)
However, replacing or with and:
Applejack has more than one and Pinkie Pie has more than one
[1.47] failure: ‘Has’ ain't no pony I've heard of. Do they have tea parties with ‘Has’?
The source of the problem is that the parser attempts to make a tuple from one and Pinkie Pie has ..., which in turn attempts to make an identifier from Pinkie Pie has .... This then fails here because has is a keyword.
I think ^? combinator is not the right approach here. The check for keywords should make the parser backtrack instead of failing.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Conjuctions don't work well because the parser confuses the word
and
with the syntax for tuples.For instance, this works with
or
:However, replacing
or
withand
:The source of the problem is that the parser attempts to make a tuple from
one and Pinkie Pie has ...
, which in turn attempts to make an identifier fromPinkie Pie has ...
. This then fails here becausehas
is a keyword.I think^?
combinator is not the right approach here. The check for keywords should make the parser backtrack instead of failing.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: