Re: RFC: c++: provide control over the stack.hh file name

[Frank Heckenbach]

Hans Åberg wrote:

> > On 28 Sep 2018, at 12:11, Akim Demaille <address@hidden> wrote:
> > 
> > I know, that's why we chose deques initially.  
> > But in reality, given
> > that we have to copy (or move) to/from the stack to the actions, I'm
> > not sure this constraint really makes sense.
> 
> You can skip it, as for me.

Wow, just wow!

Back then, you kept insisting on deque through many mails (while
misunderstanding the difference between (a) moves required in Bison
generated code, (b) moves done internally by a container class and
(c) moves in user actions; it can all be read in the archives), you
kept praising the advantages of deque
(http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bison/2018-03/msg00022.html)
and when I finally gave in and implemented it, you were like "Good."
(http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bison/2018-03/msg00024.html),
and now just: "You can skip it, as for me." Thanks!

Remind me never to follow any suggestion by you (or enter into a
discussion with you) again. Could have saved me a lot of time!

FTR, Akim, I don't care much for deque either; I use it in some
other places in my code where it makes sense, but I don't see a big
point using it in Bison, like I said back then, so you can skip it
for my sake, too.

Bye,
Frank