- From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 10:24:18 +0100
- To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Cc: public-script-coord@w3.org
Le mercredi 04 janvier 2012 à 14:08 +1100, Cameron McCormack a écrit :
> Dominique Hazael-Massieux:
> > Another case where I think the recent addition to WebIDL makes the
> > grammar no longer LL(1): since "interface" is a valid value of the
> > "identifier" production, "callback interface" could be parsed either as
> > the starting point of:
> > callback interface foo { };
> > or of:
> > callback interface = void ();
>
> As with the similar comment for union types, if you want to name
> something "interface" you'll need to write it as "_interface":
Oh right, I had forgotten about that rule, sorry for the noise :)
Dom
Received on Wednesday, 4 January 2012 09:24:57 UTC