[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: User Token Numbers
From: |
Akim Demaille |
Subject: |
Re: User Token Numbers |
Date: |
09 Apr 2002 11:59:42 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Common Lisp) |
>>>>> "Paul" == Paul Eggert <address@hidden> writes:
Paul> However, it's a bit different from `error' because it's valid to
Paul> say `%token someothertoken 257' without mentioning `$undefined',
Paul> whereas it's not valid to say `%token someothertoken 256'
Paul> without a preceding `%token error N' where N != 256.
Hm, so it would be against POSIX to accept
%token FOO 256
the user _has_ to write
%token error 257
%token FOO 256
That's a bit of a pain :(
Should the token error be #define'd in the .h? Why does it matter to
map error to 256? I fail to understand the point.
- User Token Numbers, Akim Demaille, 2002/04/08
- Re: User Token Numbers, Paul Eggert, 2002/04/08
- Re: User Token Numbers, Akim Demaille, 2002/04/08
- Re: User Token Numbers, Paul Eggert, 2002/04/08
- Re: User Token Numbers,
Akim Demaille <=
- Re: User Token Numbers, Paul Eggert, 2002/04/09
- Re: User Token Numbers, Akim Demaille, 2002/04/10
- Re: User Token Numbers, Hans Aberg, 2002/04/10
- Re: User Token Numbers, Paul Eggert, 2002/04/10
Re: User Token Numbers, Florian Krohm, 2002/04/08
Re: POSIX and reduce/reduce conflicts, Paul Eggert, 2002/04/08