[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: glr.c: Token definitions

From: Joel E. Denny
Subject: Re: glr.c: Token definitions
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 14:34:34 -0500 (EST)

On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, Akim Demaille wrote:

> >>> "Joel" == Joel E Denny <address@hidden> writes:
>  > If you were to add native bison support to autotools, how would automake
>  > know when you need yacc and when you need bison?  What if you need both?
>  > Should automake recognize a ".bison" suffix as the bison-equivalent of
>  > yacc's ".y"?  When I write a bison spec that isn't yacc-compatible, it's
>  > my habit to use ".bison" anyway... because it just seems more logical.
> Why not, that's an idea.  But you need to help Automake know what the
> output language is too.

I like the idea of multiple suffixes.  Each time you process a file, you 
knock off one.  For example:

  bison -omy_parser.c my_parser.c.bison
  gcc -omy_parser my_parser.c


  g++ -omy_parser

Bison itself could then use the spec's filename to help select a skeleton.  
This scheme would scale nicely to support other output languages (Java, 
C#, etc) if bison were to include such skeletons one day.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]