Localized precedence declarations

[Michiel Helvensteijn]

Hi,

I'm designing a language with, among other things, unary and binary operators. 
I use the Bison precedence declarations for operator precedence. I'm also 
using the precedence declarations together with %prec to resolve some other 
shift/reduce conflicts, such as the dangling else. It makes for a much 
cleaner grammar, in my opinion, than building the precedences into the 
grammar itself.

I'm now in the situation where I have multiple precedence 
declaration 'sections', each solving a separate shift/reduce conflict. One of 
them is the operator table, another would be the dangling else problem. And 
there are several others. Each of them works as intended, when viewed 
separately.

However, I now discover that Bison has silently resolved some previously 
unknown shift/reduce conflicts that I inadvertently introduced, because it is 
laying connections between my precedence sections.

Of course, I should have known this has been happening. But I would now like 
to find a way to formally separate these sections in Bison.

In 2003, Frank Heckenbach described exactly the problem I am talking about:

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-bison/2003-05/msg00035.html

The discussion seems to continue in bug-bison, and a possible solution is 
described there by Hans Aberg:

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bison/2003-05/msg00039.html

Actually, that post seems to describe a change bigger than Frank (or I) 
intended. I would personally be happy simply with the separation of 
precedence declarations (by {} brackets, for example).

It's now 6 years and a bit later. Has this problem been solved in Bison in the 
mean time? Because I can not even find a mention of this in the manual.

Thanks in advance for your reply!

-- 
Michiel Helvensteijn