Re: %destructor feedback

[Frank Heckenbach]

Joel E. Denny wrote:

> On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, Frank Heckenbach wrote:
> 
> > Akim Demaille wrote:
> >
> >> Maybe that does not deserve that much attention: it seems pretty weird
> >> not to use a value.  A warning seems a better feature.
> >
> > I sometimes attach some kinds of flags (integer type) to some
> > symbols that I need in some, but not all, rules that use that
> > symbol. So, if you go for the warning, could you please make it
> > optional? (I think it would be a useful feature in general,
> > including several of my grammars, but in some cases I'd probably
> > prefer to turn it off.)
> 
> If your semantic value is just an integer, then you probably won't declare 
> a destructor.  In that case, I should think there's no reason for bison to 
> generate a warning.  Would that resolve your issue?

That would probably work. However, I'm considering whether such a
warning might not be useful even in absence of destructors in many
cases (not the above-mentioned grammar, of course, but many others),
as not using a semantic value is often, as Akim said, pretty weird.
I can't really tell off-hand. I guess I'd have to check the effects
of such a warning on my grammars (which usually don't have
destructors, yet), but I suppose it would be useful in a number of
cases.

Frank

-- 
Frank Heckenbach, address@hidden
http://fjf.gnu.de/
GnuPG and PGP keys: http://fjf.gnu.de/plan (7977168E)