Re: Flex vs. POSIX 1003.2-1992 repeat operator {} precedence

[Vern Paxson]

> It appears that Vern's intent was
> to conform to POSIX, giving priority to POSIX conformance in cases where lex
> and POSIX diverge.

It was more like, (1) I thought lex's precedence rule was really a bad
idea, and (2) I was delighted when the POSIX interpretation appeared to
align with the more rational precedence rule used by flex.  Had I realized
it didn't, I would've fought against it while the POSIX standard was being
finalized (as I did for a number of other issues).

                Vern