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

[Akim Demaille]

> Le 28 sept. 2018 à 12:46, Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> a écrit :
> 
> 
> 
>> On 24 Sep 2018, at 22:36, Akim Demaille <a...@lrde.epita.fr> wrote:
>> 
>> In the case of stack.hh, I think we don’t care.  In fact, I expect
>> people to ‘%define api.stack.file none’ to not generate this file.
>> But in the case of location.hh/position.hh, it might be important
>> to generate them in foo/ast while the parser is in foo/parse.
>> But then, what should the #include look like?  Maybe we cannot
>> just invent it, and should also introduce api.stack.include to
>> specify it.
>> 
>> Just thinking aloud.  But I’d be happy to not be alone doing so :)
> 
> Since you asked for it:-), it would be safest to have all these helper 
> classes in the parser header, and with the same name prefix, or maybe even as 
> subclasses.

You mean inner classes.

For stack, I agree.  For locations/positions, I disagree.  Their
interest escapes that of the sole parser.  For instance, a good
AST should have locations.