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

[Paul Eggert]

Akim Demaille wrote:
> > > Another idea would be to generate an empty stack.hh file for now (actually, a file saying 
> > > only "/* This file is present only to cater to obsolescent build procedures that 
> > > expect a stack.hh file.  */", and do this even if the user does not specify any 
> > > option at all. This will help warn users that eventually the file will go away, something 
> > > that should also be put into the documentation of course.
> > I agree with this!
> > Seehttps://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bison-patches/2018-09/msg00151.html.
> >
> > I would also be happy to get your opinion about using %require
> > as a means to change the default between versions.  And for
> > instance %require 3.2 could imply don’t generate stack.hh at
> > all.
> Paul, what do you think about the previous paragraph?

Sure, that sounds good. Old uses of Bison will still work, since they won't use 
'%require 3.2'.