Compiling Java 9

[Alex Buckley]

On 11/16/2016 2:26 PM, Stephan Herrmann wrote:
> And we may safely assume regularity of the grammar, i.e.,
> the above approach will never lead to ambiguities, right?
>
> Fictitious counter example
>
>     ModuleDeclaration:
>       module open Identifier ModuleBody;
>       module Identifier ModuleBody;
>
> With this the second token could be keyword or identifier, and we're
> stuck, aren't we?
>
> May we assume that the grammar will not be extended in such ambiguous ways?

There is already a production like this:

ModuleStatement:
   requires transitive ModuleName ;
   requires ModuleName ;

Alex