mangling question.

[Alain Miniussi]

I probably overlooked something, but I have a problem 
understanding the mangling grammar:

<nested-name> ::= N <qualified-name> E
    <qualified-name> ::= <CV-qualifier> <qualified-name>
                     ::= <compound-name>
                     ::= <substitution> // rule A
    <compound-name> ::= <nesting-prefix> <unqualified-name>
                   ::= <unqualified-name>
                   ::= <substitution> // rule B
    <nesting-prefix> ::= <nesting-prefix> <nesting-qualifier>
                     ::= <nesting-qualifier>
                     ::= <substitution>
    <nesting-qualifier> ::= <namespace source-name>
                        ::= <class-enum-name>

It seems to me that there are a few ambiguities (reduce/reduce)
related with <substitution>, for example if we consider rules A and B.

Note that I just started looking at the mangling, maybe I have missed 
something obvious in the text. (I haven't found anithing related qith
this in the last mails).

Alain