Sean O'Halpin wrote:
> On Nov 16, 2007 8:26 AM, Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter / sun.com> wrote:
>> At the moment, I don't like that there's
>> only two "mostly correct" parsers in existence: Ruby's Bison-based
>> parser and JRuby's Jay-based parser.
> Hi,
> 
> I'm curious, what do you mean by "mostly correct" in the context of MRI?

If MRI is considered the gold standard, then obviously it's 100% 
correct. Of course, it can't be considered the gold standard, since 
minor things change from release to release; so I'd say all parsers 
would be some percentage of "complete" given some 
implementation-independent definition of "Ruby".

But perhaps that's just my opinion :) It's hard to say anyone is 
"correct" when there's no language specification.

- Charlie