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=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,6d9eb594a33cb947
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-01-30 21:09:26 PST
Path: 
 supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news.tele.dk!193.251.151.101!opentransit.net!jussieu.fr!enst!enst.fr!not-for-mail
From: Christoph Grein <christoph.grein@eurocopter.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: RE: very specific question on Ada syntax
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 06:01:38 +0100 (MET)
Organization: ENST, France
Sender: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org
Message-ID: <mailman.980917762.19771.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
Reply-To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin.enst.fr
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: avanie.enst.fr 980917764 52792 137.194.161.2 (31 Jan 2001 05:09:24
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@enst.fr
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 05:09:24 +0000 (UTC)
To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
Return-Path: <christoph.grein@eurocopter.de>
Content-MD5: H1hlthLPe6Y9KnkLNdKENA==
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4u sparc 
Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org
X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0
Precedence: bulk
X-Reply-To: Christoph Grein <christoph.grein@eurocopter.de>
List-Help: <mailto:comp.lang.ada-request@ada.eu.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://ada.eu.org/mailman/listinfo/comp.lang.ada>,
	<mailto: comp.lang.ada-request@ada.eu.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: comp.lang.ada mail<->news gateway <comp.lang.ada.ada.eu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://ada.eu.org/mailman/listinfo/comp.lang.ada>,
	<mailto: comp.lang.ada-request@ada.eu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://ada.eu.org/pipermail/comp.lang.ada/>
Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org
X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:4732
Date: 2001-01-31T06:01:38+01:00

Robert Dewar Wrote:

>> OK, I already knew about the difference of access and
>> 'Access, but I  ignored this deliberately.
>
>You may be confused here, when the 'Access attribute is used,
>the word access here is the reserved keyword access, not an
>identifier (go look at the grammar in the RM).
>

OK, you are right, but also the RM does not print these attributes in bold lower 
case.

So if a lexer returns them as reserved words when used as attributes, it 
complicates (hm, "complicates" seems too strong) the job of analysing source 
code. IMHO it's rather irrelevant for lexical analysis if an attribute is 
treated as a reserved word or an identifier.

So please what is the most appropriate treatment (i.e. preventing extra checks 
AFTER lexical analysis in most cases) for 'Access, 'Delta, 'Digits, 'Range? Tick 
Identifier or Tick Reserved_Word?

I would tend to say, it's better to put the extra check for these four into the 
lexer and treat them as identifiers afterwards.

>> Also here OpenToken will fail.]
>
>How? It should return access as a reserved keyword, surely
>it does ...>

Of course is does. So in the light of the above, it does not fail.