[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Bison 1.30f

From: Paul Eggert
Subject: Re: Bison 1.30f
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 12:57:10 -0800 (PST)

> From: Akim Demaille <address@hidden>
> Date: 12 Dec 2001 16:29:33 +0100
> If you can reach an agreement, then please, Paul, install your patch
> on both branches.  But I failed to see any such need personally.  I do
> use Bison output with a C++ compiler, G++, and it does work fine.

Yes, the current output works fine if your .y file doesn't use any of
the symbols reserved by bison.simple.  But haberg's point is that
(with C++) you shouldn't need to reserve _any_ symbols, except for yy*
and YY* symbols.

I think he's a bit off, as I think the code still must reserve a few
standard macro symbols like EOF and NULL in some non-default cases.
But the rest of his point is a valid one.

Even if we assume GCC, the current skeleton does reserve some
non-macro identifiers that it needn't reserve, if a C++ user defines
YYDEBUG.  So this is not an issue that is limited to non-GCC

> I am not happy to see more weird stuff in bison.simple than there
> was already before.

"bison.simple" is a relative term, isn't it?  (:-)

> After all, you can have another skeleton with you own C++ stuff.

So far the differences between the two languages are small enough that
I think it's easier to maintain one skeleton with a few ifdefs, than
to maintain two separate skeletons.

reply via email to

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