Re: Boolean partitions syntax

Sorry for a silly typo.

At Mon, 16 Apr 2018 16:17:40 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote in <20180416(dot)161740(dot)51264437(dot)horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
> Hello. Thank you for the comment.
>
> the attached v6 patch differs only in gram.y since v5.
>
> At Fri, 13 Apr 2018 18:55:30 +0900, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote in <ca37d679-014e-1895-e4bc-89b7129ce58b(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
> > Horiguchi-san,
> >
> > Thanks for the latest patch.
> >
> > On 2018/04/12 13:12, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> > > Thank you for verification and the revised patch. The format is
> > > fine and the fix is correct but I noticed that I forgot to remove
> > > plural S's from error messages. The attached is the version with
> > > the fix.
> >
> > Looking at the gram.y changes in the latest patch, I think there needs to
> > be some explanatory comments about about the new productions -- u_expr,
> > b0_expr, and c0_expr.
>
> I think I did that. And refactord the rules.
>
> It was a bother that some rules used c_expr directly but I
> managed to replace all of them with a_expr by lowering precedence

s/lowering/increasing/;

> of some ordinary keywords (PASSING, BY, COLUMNS and ROW). c_expr
> is no loger used elsewhere so we can just remove columnref from
> c_expr. Finally [abc]0_expr was eliminated and we have only
> a_expr, b_expr, u_expr and c_expr. This seems simple enough.
>
> The relationship among the rules after this change is as follows.
>
> a_expr --+-- columnref
> +-- u_expr ---+-- c_expr -- (all old c_expr stuff except columnref)
> +-- (all old a_expr stuff)
>
> b_expr --+-- columnref
> +-- c_expr -- (ditto)
> +-- (all old b_expr stuff)
>
> On the way fixing this, I noticed that the precedence of some
> keywords (PRESERVE, STRIP_P) that was more than necessary and
> corrected it.

regards,

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center