Re: can't to remove shift/reduce

[Evan Lavelle]

It's too big to make much sense of, but here's a couple of things you 
can try:

> > I'd be surprised if it works. Have you tried column_method_name both
> > with and without brackets? The default is to ignore the brackets - what
> > happens then? How are the brackets interpreted?
> without brackets it is relation or variable atribute. With brackets it
> is methods.

The grammar produces no code for the no-brackets case ("relation or 
variable attribute"). It doesn't reduce; it assumes that you wanted the 
shift, so it assumes "with brackets it is methods". Is this acceptable, 
or not? Have you got any test input that explicitly requires the 
no-brackets "relation or variable attribute" case?

> > You need to post everything that can come after 'column_method'. Is it
> > ever possible to have a '(' character after a column_method, apart from
> > the 2 ways you have shown?

To rephrase this: if your intention is to allow both of these two things:

1 - column_method, with no following '(' (ie. "relation or variable 
attribute"), *but* some other part of the grammar allows you to put in a 
following '(' anyway, AND

2 - column_method with a following '(' (ie. "with brackets it is 
methods"), THEN

you have a language ambiguity that you need to fix. At first sight, it 
seems that perhaps you may want case 1, because (at least) both 
func_name and qualified_name can be followed by '('. If you don't know 
the answer, you need to go right through the grammar to find out if case 
1 is a requirement.

Evan