[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Compatibility with old YACC syntax

From: Akim Demaille
Subject: Re: Compatibility with old YACC syntax
Date: 18 Oct 2002 16:41:37 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Honest Recruiter)

| http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=165215&repeatmerged=yes.

Hi Paul,

A friend of mine pointed out the problem above.  I have no idea what
POSIX says about this syntax for defining rule:

        a: b c = { action };

instead of the classic

        a: b c { action };

I'm not fond of supporting additional syntaxes, but if this is
mandated by POSIX, it seems that we have 1.875 :)

PS/  Byacc accepts this grammar

PS2/ This reminds me of %<, %=, %> and other historical attrocious
synonyms for %left, %nonassoc etc.  Does POSIX say something about

PS3/ Thomas, in any case, I would renovate my grammar as suggested
instead of moving away from Bison.

reply via email to

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