Re: Here we go again, pragmas…

Norm Tovey-Walsh writes:

> "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com> writes:

>> Adding pragma to the right hand side of s in the current grammar does
>> not, I think, satisfy the design goal of allowing plausible placement of
>> pragmas in both the ixml and the XML forms of a grammar.  Tom and I
>> exhibited a grammar for pragmas that I think does satisfy that design
>> goal.

> I beg your pardon. The pragmas proposal was one of the first things I
> tried to understand when I joined the CG and clearly some its technical
> details failed to find a resting place in the hollow space between my
> ears.

I'm sorry.  I didn't mean to be rude (though that's one of those things
one can succeed at without really trying, I guess).

I was just trying to reduce, very slightly, the rate at which I repeat
myself.  I am happy to explain if people don't remember or don't
understand the details or can't find the relevant bits in the pragma
proposal Tom and I wrote, but from time to time I manage to remember to
wait to be asked.

> At this point, I don’t think my musings have anything to add that’s not
> already more clearly explained in the proposal that you and Tom
> produced. Apologies for wasting everyone’s time. I learned a couple of
> things (and did work out how to make comments and pragmas inside pragmas
> appear as literal text, not embedded elements), but no one else needed
> to see me flailing about.

> My one quibble with your proposal is that I am not sold on the
> requirement to have qualified names.

Understood.  I think that people who don't want qualified names or who
despair of getting them can plausibly modify the TM proposal by
replacing the rule

    pragma: -"[", @pmark?, @pname, (whitespace, pragma-data)?, -"]".

with

    pragma: pdl, @pmark?, @name, (whitespace, pragma-data)?, pdr.

where pdl and pdr are the left and right pragma delimiters of your
choice.

> I might noodle about a bit with a
> version that doesn’t have qualfied names, but I’ll keep it to myself :-)

Now I really regret my mail of earlier this morning. 

Michael



-- 
C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
Black Mesa Technologies LLC
http://blackmesatech.com

Received on Monday, 28 February 2022 19:09:59 UTC