-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Support user define parameterizing rules #285
Conversation
cded23b
to
f4baa7f
Compare
7a08775
to
5550ec3
Compare
5550ec3
to
c0849c3
Compare
{ | ||
builder = val[2] | ||
result = val[0].append(builder) | ||
} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
result = val[0].append(builder) | ||
} | ||
|
||
rule_rhs: /* empty */ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
[Note] Rule for nested parameterizing rules like rhs IDENTIFIER parameterizing_suffix tag_opt
or rhs IDENTIFIER "(" parameterizing_args ")" tag_opt
are not defined now. It will be supported by another PR.
c932a71
to
b07ce82
Compare
Thanks for the PR. Direction is good. |
I updated this PR. Your detailed comments on the review allowed me to make corrections without question. Thank you! |
Thanks for the update, let's introduce user defined parameterizing rules into Lrama 🎉 |
No description provided.