Re: [RFA] Java skeleton

[Paolo Bonzini]

> > Shortly speaking, yes, I don't think there will be new members.  We have the
> > precedent that Bison's interface did not change in many many years, and if it
> > did, it was always only when a particular %-directive was specified.
>
> But we also have the precedent that Bison pretty much prefixes every 
> symbol, right?  Seems safer.  I'm not sure I see much harm.

Not in the C++ skeleton, which I based the Java naming convention on. 
That's also why I have YYABORT, YYACCEPT, etc.

Paolo