Inconsistency in lexis and example

[mykter]

The lexis defines FLOAT_LIT ::= -? DIGIT* . DIGIT+ EXPONENT? | -? DIGIT+ EXPONENT

The text under numeric values states:

Double-precision floating-point is also supported, and the integer 7 would be written 7., 7.0, 7e0, or any equivalent representation using a decimal point or exponent.

It looks like these are at odds: 7. doesn't match the definition of FLOAT_LIT.

[TristonianJones]

@JimLarson want to take a look?

[JimLarson]

Sure. Does anyone have a preference on whether 7. should be allowed? Preferably with a reference to the lexis of a widespread programming language.

[TristonianJones]

I'm not opposed to the change in the spec, however, the lexis accurately reflects the implementation.