On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 02:31:32AM +0100, Josef Svenningsson wrote:
> I still think there is an inconsistency here. And it has to do with maximal
> munch lexing. Maximal munch is what we normally expect from a lexer for a
> programming language. But the way comments work at the moment breaks maximal
> munch. The longest possible read is to read the whole line as a comment and
> not interpret for instance --^ as an operator. It breaks any programmers'
> intuition not only beginners'. I still get it wrong from time to time.

huh? this is exactly the opposite. maximal munch means that it would
consume everything and then interpret it as an operator. having it the
other way would be a special case because you would have to stop
consuming input after the first --.

I new this response were coming.... It basically comes down to how one interprets the maximal munch. I know there are plenty of people who agree with you. But there are those that agree with my standpoint as well. I'm not going to propose that we start arguing about this. I suppose we'll have to use other arguments to persuade each other about the comment syntax.

/Josef