Re: Tell a rule to shift instead of reduce?

[Hans Aberg]

On 17 Dec 2013, at 09:25, Adam Smalin <address@hidden> wrote:

> I still need help with this. I rewrote it maybe this will be more clear?
> 
> I want to allow this
> 
> var = var
> var, var = var
> var = var, var

If you can do dynamic type checking, it suffices to write rules (as in the 
Bison manual calculator example):

expr:
    expr "op0" expr
  | expr "op1" expr
  ...
;

And then add precedence rules:

%left ","

%nonassoc "then"
%nonassoc "else"

%right "≔"

It works fine to resolve dangling "else" with precedences as well. The normal 
way to break precedences is with matched pairs () [] {} etc. 

Hans