(j3.2006) resolving grammar ambiguities

[Malcolm Cohen]

Van Snyder wrote:
> The "or expr" part of R737 is unnecessary, but harmless, since the
> second derivation arrives at the same syntax [...]

An ambiguity is still an ambiguity.  At best it is a mistake waiting to happen 
(if both parses end up with identical syntax, constraints and semantics i.e. 
effects) the next time something is changed.

I don't think we need ptr => expr any more, if so it ought to be deleted.

Cheers,
-- 
................................Malcolm Cohen, Nihon NAG, Tokyo.