On Wed, 15 Apr 2009, Akim Demaille wrote:
> I don't like too much this approach, I prefer simply welcoming dashes in the
> set of letters that can compose symbol names. Of course we would have to have
> warnings and errors in Yacc mode, but that should not be hard, we certainly
> have one well defined point by which we always pass to make a symbol name. I
> also like that identifiers and directives are only separated by %.
>
> But what do others think?
What about tokens and the union name? These can't have dashes. Do we let
the compiler catch that, or should Bison?
> There is one clear downside: named references. The period is already causing
> nasty issues when reading { .. $foo.bar .. }, introducing dashes will not
> improve the situation { .. $foo-bar .. }. I would stick to the principle that
> identifier in the action should stick to C symbols, that exclude dashes and
> periods, so this was { .. $[foo]-bar .. } "of course".
I agree. Now we need to consider the "misleading reference" complaints
again.
