[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [RFA] Java skeleton

From: Joel E. Denny
Subject: Re: [RFA] Java skeleton
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 04:38:28 -0500 (EST)

On Tue, 27 Feb 2007, Paolo Bonzini wrote:

> > Your Java skeletons do allow users to add members to the parser and lexer
> > classes, so it seems to me that you have much more to worry about.  I find
> > it hard to believe that you will never decide to add some new really useful
> > public method.
> I find it hard that this wouldn't have been added already in the C skeleton.
> :-)

Sorry, I'm not quite sure what you're saying.

> > Still, from the point of view of the parser's end user (who may not even
> > know what Bison is), it seems ugly to have a public interface where some
> > large arbitrary portion of the methods have names prefixed by yy.
> Yes, that's the reason why I think parse() should remain unprefixed, for
> example.

But if the Bison user defines his own class to wrap the parser class (like 
the parser driver), he can create whatever interface he likes for the 
parser user.

reply via email to

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