+Yet this proposal introduces another kind of ambiguity! The input
+@samp{word word} can be parsed as a single @code{words} composed of two
+@samp{word}s, or as two one-@code{word} @code{words} (and likewise for
+@code{redirect}/@code{redirects}). However this ambiguity is now a
+shift/reduce conflict, and therefore it can now be addressed with precedence
+directives.
+
+To simplify the matter, we will proceed with @code{word} and @code{redirect}
+being tokens: @code{"word"} and @code{"redirect"}.
+
+To prefer the longest @code{words}, the conflict between the token
+@code{"word"} and the rule @samp{sequence: sequence words} must be resolved
+as a shift. To this end, we use the same techniques as exposed above, see
+@ref{Non Operators,, Using Precedence For Non Operators}. One solution
+relies on precedences: use @code{%prec} to give a lower precedence to the
+rule:
+
+@example
+%nonassoc "word"
+%nonassoc "sequence"
+%%
+@group
+sequence:
+ /* empty */
+| sequence word %prec "sequence"
+| sequence redirect %prec "sequence"
+;
+@end group
+
+@group
+words:
+ word
+| words "word"
+;
+@end group
+@end example
+
+Another solution relies on associativity: provide both the token and the
+rule with the same precedence, but make them right-associative:
+
+@example
+%right "word" "redirect"
+%%
+@group
+sequence:
+ /* empty */
+| sequence word %prec "word"
+| sequence redirect %prec "redirect"
+;
+@end group
+@end example
+
projects / bison.git / commitdiff
