Re: member with constructor not allowed in union

[Akim Demaille]

>>>>> "Richard" == Richard B Kreckel <address@hidden> writes:

>> I'm for providing a degraded bison.simple for C++ users.  Is that
>> OK, or in addition you'd want the regular bison.simple to be OK
>> with C++?

Richard> [X] I would prefer the regular bison.simple to work with C++,
Richard> so we don't have to change all the packages.

I'll do that.

Richard> What was wrong with the old skeleton?  

It was cleaned up for 64 bit architectures.

Richard> And, out of curiosity: what makes the stack double-ended?

Sorry, I don't understand your question.  What are you referring to?
There are indeed two pointers: one for the top of the stack, and one
for its bottom, so that we can realloc it.  Is it what you mean?

Richard> Hmm, AFAICT, YYSTYPE is int and always has been...

I mean, what is the range of yylval types you have.