Subject: Re: New XSLT draft From: Denys Duchier <Denys.Duchier@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: 12 Jul 1999 10:04:09 +0200 |
James Clark <jjc@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > The tricky bit is the lexer. Once you tokenize things properly, the > grammar is pretty straighforward. Try this (I haven't tested this other > than to run yacc on it): Aha! I didn't think of shifting this work over to the tokenizer, but now that I see it, it makes a great deal of sense. I finally understand what section 3.7 was trying to tell me. I actually managed to tweak the original grammar to remove the conflicts, but now I'll try it your way as it is clearly superior. Thanks. Cheers, -- Dr. Denys Duchier Denys.Duchier@xxxxxxxxxxxx Forschungsbereich Programmiersysteme (Programming Systems Lab) Universitaet des Saarlandes, Geb. 45 http://www.ps.uni-sb.de/~duchier Postfach 15 11 50 Phone: +49 681 302 5618 66041 Saarbruecken, Germany Fax: +49 681 302 5615 XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: New XSLT draft, James Clark | Thread | Re: New XSLT draft, Rick Geimer |
Re: New XSLT draft, James Clark | Date | RE: Sort what and how ?, Kay Michael |
Month |