Closed rnd0101 closed 6 years ago
Good catch. Here's where standalone list-form belongs:
〈obap-form〉 ::= ( 〈ob-exp〉 ) | 〈list-form〉
| 〈obap-form〉 〈list-form〉
| 〈obap-form〉 ( 〈arguments〉 )
I added the necessary
I〈obap-form〉⎾ 〈list-form〉 ⏋=: I〈list-form〉
You're right that there is still no standalone 〈list-form〉
. It's the standalone 〈obap-form〉
case that's missing. So, in the summary grammar and the full grammar
〈ae〉 ::= 〈ae-form〉 | 〈obap-form〉 | 〈obap-form〉 〈ae-form〉
along with
I〈ae〉⎾ 〈obap-form〉 ⏋ =: I〈obap-form〉
I've made these repairs in ob-exp.txt 0.0.6
Here list-form can't be standalone (eg
[a]
). Summary grammar seems ok. Remove<obap-form>
before<list-form>
?https://github.com/orcmid/miser/blob/0a57c7defaa6a4b8291301e52a41ab5ad879a974/oMiser/ob-exp.txt#L111
In other words,
[x,y,z]
or[]
does not parse, whilex[x,y,z]
does. Just removing<obap-form>
does not help, so summary grammar may be not ok after all... please, check.(Adding obap_form to unary seems to work.)
Also
-form-form
in one place, in interpretation.