[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level.
From: |
Joel E. Denny |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level. |
Date: |
Fri, 10 Apr 2009 10:36:36 -0400 (EDT) |
Hi Akim,
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009, Akim Demaille wrote:
> > I'm not suggesting we change that. I'm just suggesting that %printer also
> > have access to the symbol_type object as well. Otherwise, the user will
> > have to put the parts together by constructing his own temporary
> > symbol_type object in order to invoke operator<< from within %printer.
>
> I'm sorry, I don't understand here. Sure, we can provided access to it, but
> to what end? operator<< of a symbol_type bounces to the various %printer
> implementations, so these should not bounce back to it.
I think this is the main point of my misunderstanding. I thought you had
decided operator<< could not invoke %printer because operator<< did not
have access to the parse params required by %printer. I suggested that
%printer would instead invoke operator<<. It's the reverse. It's not a
recursion.
However, I think maybe I need to study your C++ skeletons more before I
can discuss this issue intelligently.
> > By the way, why "symbol_type"? Why not just "symbol"? Isn't the symbol
> > type just one field of the triple? Maybe I'm misunderstanding something
> > fundamental.
>
> What I call a symbol (implemented as the type symbol_type)
Hmm. If I wanted a class for squares and circles, I would call them
square and circle not square_type and circle_type. Otherwise, every class
ends with _type, which seems redundant. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the
reason for _type.
> One issue with the current interface for %printer is also that I encourage
> users to output on debug_stream(). So of course we could
Before I can think about this issue, I really need to understand the
relationship between operator<< and %printer.
Sorry for the confusion.
- [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level., Akim Demaille, 2009/04/03
- Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level., Akim Demaille, 2009/04/03
- Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level., Joel E. Denny, 2009/04/04
- Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level., Akim Demaille, 2009/04/06
- Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level., Joel E. Denny, 2009/04/08
- Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level., Akim Demaille, 2009/04/08
- Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level., Joel E. Denny, 2009/04/09
- Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level., Akim Demaille, 2009/04/10
- Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level.,
Joel E. Denny <=
- Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level., Akim Demaille, 2009/04/10
- Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level., Joel E. Denny, 2009/04/10
- Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level., Akim Demaille, 2009/04/14
- Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level., Joel E. Denny, 2009/04/14
- Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level., Akim Demaille, 2009/04/15
- Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level., Joel E. Denny, 2009/04/16
- Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level., Joel E. Denny, 2009/04/09
- Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level., Akim Demaille, 2009/04/10
- Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level., Joel E. Denny, 2009/04/10
- Re: [PATCH] Factor %FLAG at scan level., Akim Demaille, 2009/04/14