How can I explicitly break out of lexyd::list()?

[RFoe]

  struct __impl {
    [[__maybe_unused__]]
    static constexpr auto rule = [] consteval noexcept {
      return __lexyd::loop(
               __lexyd::peek(__leading_for<__static>) >> __lexyd::p<__static>
// {{ ?name: int }} pattern could only appear at last segment, so break out here
               | (__lexyd::peek(__leading_for<__parameter>) >> (__lexyd::lookahead(__lexyd::question_mark, __lexyd::colon) >> (__lexyd::p<__parameter> + __lexyd::break_) | __lexyd::else_ >> __lexyd::p<__parameter>) )
               | __lexyd::peek(__leading_for<__any>)
                   >> __lexyd::p<__any> >> __lexyd::break_)
           + __lexyd::opt(__lexyd::slash) // eat optional trailing slash
           + __lexyd::eof;
    }();
    // [[__maybe_unused__]]
    // static constexpr auto value = ::lexy::bind_sink(__radix_tree_sink{}, ::lexy::parse_state);
  };

since lexyd::p<...> used, the production produces values in pattern rule(lexyd::loop)

In template: static assertion failed due to requirement 'sizeof...(Args) == 0': pattern rule must not produce any valuesclang(static_assert_requirement_failed)

if i change lexyd::loop to lexyd::list, then lexyd::break being unusable.

or should i use lexyd::must(lexyd::eof).error<...> instead?

[foonathan]

Yes, dsl::break_ only works with dsl::loop, not dsl::list. I could extend dsl::list to also support dsl::break_ if you have a use case, but if your pattern is: dsl::loop(a | b | c >> break_), you can turn that into dsl::list(a | b) + c (potentially with dsl::must for better diagnostics.

[RFoe]

Thanks. dsl::list(a | b) + c will do enougth