World: r3wp

Why did you put #"'" into the c-word definition?

I forgot to add #"'" in the charset.

c-word: complement union charset "()[]^"{}/;<>,\#$%:@^@" whitespace

Good, you saw it

you're fast

I also forgot to add the special cases for + and -

c-word: complement union charset "()[]^"{}/;<>,\#$%:@^@" whitespace
word-syntax: [
	  [#"." | #"+" | #"-" | not #"'"] c-word any [c-word | digit]
	  | #"." | #"+" | #"-"
]

Thanks to your notes

Well it's more complex than that.
+' and -' are invalid

Maybe
word-syntax: [
	[#"." | #"+" not #"'"| #"-" not #"'"| not #"'"] 
		c-word any [c-word | digit]
	| #"." | #"+" | #"-"
]

lots of exceptions, indeed

Should that be enforced with [termination] also ?

Well, this way it would accept some unacceptable strings, like "." 
in ".1" e.g.

However, the TERMINATION can be added to the whole word syntax combined 
from the partial syntax cases

Well there are some annoyng  cases when values are stuck together 
but valids.
>> [a< 1]
== [a < 1]

termination can't be used to the whole

yes, needs some care

I need a pause :-)

however, your example looks to be R2-specific

good night

gn

last attempt for tonight

word-syntax: [
	[#"." | #"+" not #"'" | #"-" not #"'" | not #"'" and c-word] 
	[
		c-word any [c-word | digit]
		| termination
	]
]

Too obfuscated maybe
Feel free to go on anyone

Word syntax (for R3), in a comment here: http://issue.cc/r3/1302

It doesn't handle the other word types yet, so it needs work. Some 
of the syntax bug tickets came from that.

When it comes to things like word syntax, the errors raised for bad 
syntax and the particular cases where they are raised need to be 
part of the rules.

In a full syntax description, some of those charsets would be named 
differently of course.

You raise a good question Brian. Should the rules emit their own 
errors ? 

I guess the intent is to keep them light for now. If an error occurs, 
the parsing just stop.

Another guess is that alternative rules (eg. inside value-syntax) 
should be kept order independent when possible (with the drawback 
that they are slightly more convoluted than necessary).

last but not least


word-char: complement union charset "()[]^"{}/;<>,\#$%:@^@" whitespace
word-ext: [
	word-char any [word-char | digit]
	[and [#"<" | #">"] | termination]
]
word-syntax: [
	not sign not #"." not #"'" word-ext 
	| #"." [and [#"<" | #">"] | termination]
	| #"." word-ext
	| sign termination
	| sign not #"'" word-ext
	| more-less-word
]

grumpffff, still missing the cases with prefix [+.] and [-.]

word-syntax: [
	not sign not #"." not #"'" word-ext 
	| #"." [and [#"<" | #">"] | termination]
	| #"." word-ext
	| sign termination
	| sign not #"'" opt #"." word-ext      ; <--- there
	| more-less-word
]

I committed a slightly different variant (but based on your findings 
as well). Could you (or other volunteers) check it, please?

Remaining problems with [termination] in word-syntax.
When a word is stuck with a less-word or a tag (R2 and R3)
a<
 == [a <] valid
a<=
 == [a <=] valid
a<>
 == [a <>] valid
a<<
 == [a <<] valid
a<tag>
 == [a <tag>] valid

a>=
 invalid
a>
 invalid
a>>
 invalid

IMO, t's enough to check if the following char is #"<" only

word-syntax: [
	slash-word termination
	| more-less-word termination
	| opt sign [#"." | not #"'"] not digit any word-char
		[termination | and #"<"]
]

a<
 == [a <] - this does not work in R3

???? it's working there

>> system/version
== 2.100.95.3.1

>> system/version
== 2.100.111.3.1

Humm... a bit old, well with the last version you're true

but, it remains a problem when followed by a tag

A112 (not released) is reported to have other improvements related 
to get-words and set-words

remains a problem when followed by a tag
 - indeed, needs adjustment then

A question for Brian: do you think the case:


load "a<a>" ; == [a <a>] shall be mentioned in CC? (and, eventually, 
where?, a new ticket or an old one?)

Question:
Why #"/" is in termination-char ?

(termination-char: union whitespace charset "()[]^"{}/^@;" )

That is because #"/" is a separator in paths

well it's a problem for the other datatypes which use [termination]

example?

example: word-syntax
with the current ruke a word can be terlinated with #"/'

*rule

yes, but that is not a problem

*terminated/followed

(is it?)

>> hh/
** Syntax Error: Invalid path -- hh/
** Near: (line 1) hh/

Yes, but that is not a problem for the word, it is an invalid path