Parsing bug with 'return not' (was, Syntax bug)

Ruby
1

On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 03:50:01 -0400, Bil K. wrote:

myrect.rb:8: syntax error, unexpected kNOT, expecting kEND
return not ((other.x1 < self.x0 or self.x1 < other.x0) and

You need to use the ‘!’ operator instead of the ‘not’ “conjunction”.
It’s a precedence thing – the parser is seeing ‘return not’ – see
parse.y in the source.

Thanks, maybe I’ll look. It’s not just precedence though, or else
‘return’ itself is part of it:

def ok
return (not true)
end

def fails
return not true
end

And note that within an ‘if’, it works as you’d expect:

def with_parens_ok
if (not true)
puts “not true”
end
end

def no_parens_ok
if not true
puts “not true”
end
end

2

On 7/22/07, Good Night M. [email protected] wrote:

On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 03:50:01 -0400, Bil K. wrote:

myrect.rb:8: syntax error, unexpected kNOT, expecting kEND
return not ((other.x1 < self.x0 or self.x1 < other.x0) and

You need to use the ‘!’ operator instead of the ‘not’ “conjunction”.
It’s a precedence thing – the parser is seeing ‘return not’ – see
parse.y in the source.

Thanks, maybe I’ll look. It’s not just precedence though, or else
‘return’ itself is part of it:

if binds differently than return. It is precedence.

3

On 7/22/07, Gregory B. [email protected] wrote:

‘return’ itself is part of it:

if binds differently than return. It is precedence.

Except that return isn’t an operator. As far as I can tell, looking
at parse.y for ruby1.8.6 the parse tree for the original statement
which raised the question

return not true

should be:

command_call
kRETURN expr
kNOT expr
primary
var_ref
variable
kTRUE

There definitely looks to be something strange here.

–
Rick DeNatale

My blog on Ruby
http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/