[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: experimental features in Bison 2.3a+
From: |
Hans Aberg |
Subject: |
Re: experimental features in Bison 2.3a+ |
Date: |
Wed, 6 Dec 2006 09:53:19 +0100 |
On 5 Dec 2006, at 23:28, Joel E. Denny wrote:
, there might be
problems in the future, if the code part should be parsed
according to
language. Then %define is better reserved for verbatim macros, and
%code for
code placement.
For verbatim strings:
%define "NAME" "STRING"
No, just one line. This why <code> had to be added.
For code that needs to be parsed:
%define "NAME" { CODE }
How does calling it %code in the second case solve the problem of
multiple
languages?
Because parsing of the code part needs to be changed according to
language. For a macro define, that seems to be a poor practice.
Hans Aberg
Re: experimental features in Bison 2.3a+, Hans Aberg, 2006/12/03
Re: experimental features in Bison 2.3a+, Hans Aberg, 2006/12/04
- Re: experimental features in Bison 2.3a+, Joel E. Denny, 2006/12/04
- Re: experimental features in Bison 2.3a+, Hans Aberg, 2006/12/05
- Re: experimental features in Bison 2.3a+, Joel E. Denny, 2006/12/05
- Re: experimental features in Bison 2.3a+,
Hans Aberg <=
- Re: experimental features in Bison 2.3a+, Joel E. Denny, 2006/12/06
- Re: experimental features in Bison 2.3a+, Hans Aberg, 2006/12/06