From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD, FREEMAIL_FROM,T_FILL_THIS_FORM_SHORT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 2002:a5e:a913:: with SMTP id c19mr19478573iod.32.1546376613362; Tue, 01 Jan 2019 13:03:33 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:aca:cc0f:: with SMTP id c15mr509457oig.3.1546376613189; Tue, 01 Jan 2019 13:03:33 -0800 (PST) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.uzoreto.com!feeder.erje.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.166.216.MISMATCH!q69no67661itb.0!news-out.google.com!v141ni199ita.0!nntp.google.com!k10no67638itk.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2019 13:03:32 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2003:e7:ff1c:45c:d63d:7eff:fe98:7b00; posting-account=Md_OIgoAAAAkZyQ6nYoc3WBIThMpPfV7 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2003:e7:ff1c:45c:d63d:7eff:fe98:7b00 References: <30ba8954-a19e-4c95-b350-798b0276db41@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <66f4b77c-bd72-4044-a9a5-48e1dc8d77a9@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Ada grammar rules for names too permissive? From: olivermkellogg@gmail.com Injection-Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2019 21:03:33 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:55157 Date: 2019-01-01T13:03:32-08:00 List-Id: On Tuesday, January 1, 2019 at 9:06:59 PM UTC+1, Stephen Leake wrote: > > [...] > > This is precisely why I use a generalized LR parser for Emacs Ada mode; I don't have to mess with the published grammar. It works very well in practice. Hmm... I downloaded org.emacs.ada-mode-6.0.1.tar.bz2, is that what you are talking about? In there, I see a file ada.wy which seems to be an Ada grammar, is that what you are talking about? What do you do with 12.3 : explicit_generic_actual_parameter ::= expression | (variable_)name | (subprogram_)name | (entry_)name | subtype_mark | (package_instance_)name If I leave away the italics I get: explicit_generic_actual_parameter ::= expression | name | name | name | subtype_mark | name So.. it seems I can answer my own question about solidifying the italics; that's what should be done, otherwise we get nonsense.