[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Clang compile error

From: Lawrence Murray
Subject: Re: Clang compile error
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2018 12:33:59 +0800
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0

Hi Akim,

Thanks for the response, and for all your work on Bison!

Sorry, I discovered this recently too, see 
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bison-patches/2018-11/msg00042.html.  I 
don’t know whether that means I should release a 3.2.2.  WDYT?
Looks like you've just got a 3.2.2 out, so I guess the fix is there?
Does that mean that you are a user of glr.cc?  I don’t much feedback about it, 
unfortunately.  Also, I’m looking for the opinion about a proposal for GLR 
parsers: see

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bison-patches/2013-02/msg00105.html and
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bison-patches/2018-11/msg00008.html and 

Yes, indeed, we use it for the parser of the Birch probabilistic programming language (birch-lang.org). We started with the basic LALR(1) parser, but as the language has developed, a GLR parser has become necessary for our chosen syntax.

I'll have a better look at these proposals later, but yes, in general, it would be nice to be able to specify precisely where the conflicts are expected, rather than just the total number expected. When using %expect declarations, I find myself writing explanations as to where these conflicts are (see e.g. lines 84-91 here: https://github.com/lawmurray/Birch/blob/model/bi/parser.ypp), and it would be preferable for these to be formalised.



reply via email to

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