[Issue 1466] Spec claims maximal munch technique always works:not for "1..3"

[BCS]

Reply to Jascha,

> d-bugmail at puremagic.com wrote:
> 
>> // thinks it's [0 ... 1], no maximal munch taking place
>> assert (Foo[0... 1] == 0);
>> }
> this *is* maximal munch taking place. because of the ".." lexeme,
> float literals are not lexemes. they are context free production rules
> consisting of multiple lexemes. therefore "0." consists of two lexemes
> and "..." wins the max munch over ".".
> 

But is it the the correct way to do it? (Not is is doing what the spec says, 
but is it doing what it should be designed to do)