World: r3wp

http://issue.cc/r3/1477- Special-case / words not recognized in 
lit-word!,  get-word! or set-word! form

http://issue.cc/r3/1478- Special-case arrow-based words not recognized 
in set-word! or refinement! form

Those seem to be the last two unimplemented syntax fixes in R3, at 
least that I can find/remember.

However, it looks like R3's issue! syntax isn't final: http://issue.cc/r3/1657
- Define the valid lexical forms for ISSUE! datatype

http://issue.cc/r3/1477- however, the slash-words can have neither 
the refinement-syntax nor the path-syntax; because of that they remain 
"problematic" anyway

how about the + and - words? Is there a ticket for the refinement 
syntax?

Yeah, an implemented one.

You mean http://issue.cc/r3/1856I assume?

Yup. I guess it's built for an unreleased version. I was wondering 
why it's not marked as tested.

Pity that A112 never came to be up until today, then.

(Same for http://issue.cc/r3/1855.But in that case, at least ////x 
still loads in R3 :)

Attempt for word datatype
 

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

hmm, it looks that #"^@" "works" as "END LOAD"

??? I don't get it

Oh, I see. you mean that "^@" is a problem wherever it is placed 
in a script

It's not specific to the word! syntax

At first I thought it should be better in whitespace

better placed

Check END-LOAD

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