From: Lucretia <laguest9000@googlemail.com>
Subject: Re: Placement of pragmas in the grammar (language laywers required)
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 06:39:08 -0800 (PST)
Date: 2015-12-10T06:39:08-08:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5d3adf6a-7933-47c7-8a6c-cf1a395605c0@googlegroups.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f3829f17-b212-447f-b130-f9d1f89c93f0@googlegroups.com>
Having looked at this again, basic_declaration would derive to pragma from any of the enclosed *_declaration rules, in this case type_declaration, so having it in both cases does seem wrong.
Maybe I should start by adding it to the *_items first and see if any of the *_declaration rules would derive to pragma??
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-10 14:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-12-10 7:46 Placement of pragmas in the grammar (language laywers required) Lucretia
2015-12-10 14:39 ` Lucretia [this message]
2015-12-10 17:12 ` Bob Duff
2015-12-10 17:59 ` Lucretia
2015-12-10 18:19 ` Bob Duff
2015-12-10 23:47 ` Randy Brukardt
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox