[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RFC] %language declaration
From: |
Tim Van Holder |
Subject: |
Re: [RFC] %language declaration |
Date: |
Thu, 14 Sep 2006 12:03:40 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (Windows/20060719) |
Akim Demaille wrote:
>>>> "Paul" == Paul Eggert <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden> writes:
> >>> Would something similar, of course with documentation and against
> >>> mainline rather than 2.0, be ok to apply? The copyright process is
> >>> in the works.
>
> > I like the idea, and thanks.
>
> > Akim, what do you think? I vaguely recall you wanted something like
> > this but don't recall the details.
>
> Actually it is the converse: I meant to avoid as much as possible any
> reference to the output language in the input, because I have yet to
> see where it can be useful.
Well, since the actions are written in the target language, and bison
supports multiple languages, it makes sense to have a %language
directive, imho.
Ideally skeletons should be required to declare their language, so that
using "--skeleton lalr1.cc" or "--skeleton my-erlang-parser.skeleton" on
a grammar with "%language java" would produce a bison-time
warning/error.
- [RFC] %language declaration, Paolo Bonzini, 2006/09/11
- Re: [RFC] %language declaration, Paolo Bonzini, 2006/09/11
- Re: [RFC] %language declaration, Paul Eggert, 2006/09/11
- Re: [RFC] %language declaration, Akim Demaille, 2006/09/14
- Re: [RFC] %language declaration, Paolo Bonzini, 2006/09/14
- Re: [RFC] %language declaration, Akim Demaille, 2006/09/14
- Re: [RFC] %language declaration, Paolo Bonzini, 2006/09/14
- Re: [RFC] %language declaration, Akim Demaille, 2006/09/14
- Re: [RFC] %language declaration, Paolo Bonzini, 2006/09/15
- Re: [RFC] %language declaration,
Tim Van Holder <=
- Re: [RFC] %language declaration, Akim Demaille, 2006/09/14
Re: [RFC] %language declaration, Tim Van Holder, 2006/09/14