Re: Parse::RecDescent Grammar Questions

I think I understand what your question is. Does it have to do with this set of rules:

def:     "cluster" name "(" Attr(s?) ")"
         | "system"  name "(" Attr(s?) ")"

Attr:   AttrScalar(s?)
        | AttrKeyList(s?)
        | AttrAssociation(s?)
[download]

and do you really want the following:

def:     "cluster" name "(" Attr(s?) ")"
         | "system"  name "(" Attr(s?) ")"

Attr:   AttrScalar
        | AttrKeyList
        | AttrAssociation
[download]

Otherwise I wouldn't be surprised if the parser sees a reduce-reduce conflict.

Comment on Re: Parse::RecDescent Grammar Questions Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Parse::RecDescent Grammar Questions by ikegami (Patriarch) on May 20, 2008 at 21:05 UTC
Isn't the expression "reduce-reduce conflict" exclusive to LR parsers? P::RD is a LL parser.	[reply]
Re^3: Parse::RecDescent Grammar Questions by pc88mxer (Vicar) on May 20, 2008 at 21:37 UTC
Yeah, you're probably right. In this case `Parse::RecDescent` probably resolves it by choosing one without informing you that there are other options - just my guess, though.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^4: Parse::RecDescent Grammar Questions by ikegami (Patriarch) on May 20, 2008 at 21:53 UTC
It always tries them in order until one succeeds. If none do, it backtracks. In this case, the first one always succeeds (seeing as it can match zero items).	[reply]