Re: inserting into tab.h, after %union

[Hans Aberg]

On 5 Dec 2006, at 23:30, Joel E. Denny wrote:

> > > > The problem is that different languages use different paradigms,  
> > > > and it
> > > > m,ay
> > > > not be possible to do this stuff in that context then.
> > >
> > > Until we know what those languages are, I'm not sure how to  
> > > handle them.
> >
> > So then you cannot produce a unified commend set.
>
> Potentially, but I'm not inclined to complicate the existing  
> directives as
> we grope in the dark trying to accommodate future target languages  
> that we
> haven't even identified yet.

This is what I am saying: you may already have done that by the  
current commands.

I propose to keep language specific, low-level names, until one can  
see what features are language independent, and then succesively  
replace them.

> > The point is that a name like %provides sounds as thouh it has  
> > something to do
> > with the sematics to do, when in reality, it is a language  
> > specific file
> > setup.
>
> It does have something to do with semantics, ...

The language specific parts of the semantics implementation.

> and the low-level details
> vary with the target language.

So what happens if one uses a polymorphic hierarchy, with a different  
header structure to accomodate for that?

I mainly worried getting commands, hard to understand, conflicting or  
not usable with the uses I may need.

  Hans Aberg